On 06/12/2014 05:27 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 06/12/2014 05:17 PM, David Kranz wrote:
Tempest has a number of tests in various services for deleting objects
that mostly return 204. Many, but not all, of these tests go on to check
that the resource was actually deleted but do so in different ways.
Sometimes they go into a timeout loop waiting for a GET on the object to
fail. Sometimes they immediately call DELETE again or GET and assert
that it fails. According to what I can see about the HTTP "spec", 204
should mean that the object was deleted. So is waiting for something to
disappear unnecessary? Is immediate assertion wrong? Does this behavior
vary service to service? We should be as consistent about this as
possible but I am not sure what the expected behavior of all services
actually is.

The main problem I've seen is that while the resource is deleted, it stays in a deleting state for some time, and quotas don't get adjusted until the server is finally set to a terminated status.
So you are talking about nova here. In tempest I think we need to more clearly distinguish when delete is being called to test the delete api vs. as part of some cleanup. There was an irc discussion related to this recently. The question is, if I do a delete and get a 204, can I expect that immediately doing another delete or get will fail? And that question needs an answer for each api that has delete in order to have proper tests for delete.

 -David

Best,
-jay


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


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

Reply via email to