Hi,

Yair and I were discussing a change that I initiated and was incorporated into the test_network_basic_ops test. It was intended as a configuration control point for floating IP address assignments before actually testing connectivity. The question we were discussing was whether this check was a valid pass/fail criteria for tests like test_network_basic_ops.

The initial motivation for the change was that test_network_basic_ops had a less than 50/50 chance of passing in my local environment for whatever reason. After looking at the test, it seemed ridiculous that it should be failing. The problem is that more often than not the data that was available in the logs all pointed to it being set up correctly but the ping test for connectivity was timing out. From the logs it wasn't clear that the test was failing because neutron did not do the right thing, did not do it fast enough, or is something else happening? Of course if I paused the test for a short bit between setup and the checks to manually verify everything the checks always passed. So it's a timing issue right?

Two things: adding more timeout to a check is as appealing to me as gargling glass AND I was less "annoyed" that the test was failing as I was that it wasn't clear from reading logs what had gone wrong. I tried to find an additional intermediate control point that would "split" failure modes into two categories: neutron is too slow in setting things up and neutron failed to set things up correctly. Granted it still is adding timeout to the test, but if I could find a control point based on "settling" so that if it passed, then there is a good chance that if the next check failed it was because neutron actually screwed up what it was trying to do.

Waiting until the query on the nova for the floating IP information seemed a relatively reasonable, if imperfect, "settling" criteria before attempting to connect to the VM. Testing to see if the floating IP assignment gets to the nova instance details is a valid test and, AFAICT, missing from the current tests. However, Yair has the reasonable point that connectivity is often available long before the floating IP appears in the nova results and that it could be considered invalid to use non-network specific criteria as pass/fail for this test.

In general, the validity of checking for the presence of a floating IP in the server details is a matter of interpretation. I think it is a given that it must be tested somewhere and that if it causes a test to fail then it is as valid a failure than a ping failing. Certainly I have seen scenarios where an IP appears, but doesn't actually work and others where the IP doesn't appear (ever, not just in really long while) but magically works. Both are bugs. Which is more appropriate to tests like test_network_basic_ops?

Currently, the polling interval for the checks in the gate should be tuned. They are borrowing other polling configuration and I can see it is ill-advised. It is currently polling at an interval of a second and if the intent is to wait for the entire system to settle down before proceeding then polling nova that quickly is too often. It simply increases the load while we are waiting to adapt to a loaded system. For example in the course of a three minute timeout, the floating IP check polled nova for server details 180 times.

All this aside it is granted that checking for the floating IP in the nova instance details is imperfect in itself. There is nothing that assures that the presence of that information indicates that the networking backend is done its work.

Comments, suggestions, queries, foam bricks?

Cheers,

Brent

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to