On 04/08/2015 05:24 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 04/08/2015 07:38 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
On 04/08/2015 12:53 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 04/08/2015 03:58 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
On 04/08/2015 06:23 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote:
Hi,
Now Nova and Ironic have implemented API microversions in Kilo.
Nova's microversions are v2.1 - v2.3.
Ironic's microversions are v1.1 - v1.6.
Now Tempest is testing the lowest microversion on the gate, and
Ironic's microversions test patch[1] is on the gerrit.
Before merging the patch, I'd like to propose consistent test way for
microversions of Nova and Ironic.
My suggestion is the test target microversions are:
* the lowest microversion
* the biggest microversion, but don't use the keyword "latest" on a
header and these microversions tests are operated on different gate
jobs.
The lowest microversion is already tested on check-tempest-dsvm-full
or something, so this proposes just to add the biggest microversion
job like check-tempest-dsvm-full-big-microversion.
[background]
In long-term, these microversions continue increasing and it is
difficult to run Tempest for all microversions on the gate because of
test workload. So I feel we need to select microversions which are
tested on the gate for efficient testing.
[the lowest microversion]
On microversion mechanism, if a client *doesn't* specify favorite
microversion in its request header, a Nova/Ironic server considers the
request as the lowest microversion. So the lowest microversion is
default behavior and important. I think we need to test it at least.
[the biggest microversion]
On microversion mechanism, if a client specify the keyword "latest" in
its request header instead of microversion, a Nova/Ironic server works
on the biggest microversion behavior.
During the development, there is time lag between each project dev and
Tempest dev. After adding a new API on a project, corresponding tests
are added to Tempest in most cases. So if specifying the keyword
"latest", Tempest would not handle the request/response and fail,
because Tempest can not catch the latest API changes until
corresponding Tempest patch is merged.
So it is necessary to have the target microversion config option in
Tempest and pass specific biggest microversion to Tempest with
openstack-infra/project-config.
Any thoughts?
Hi! I've already stated this point in #openstack-ironic and I'd like to
reiterate: if we test only the lowest and the highest microversions
essentially means (or at least might mean) that the other are broken. At
least in Ironic only some unit tests actually touch code paths for
versions 1.2-1.5. As we really can't test too many versions, I suggest
we stop producing a microversion for every API feature feature change in
L. No idea what to do with 1.2-1.5 now except for politely asking people
not to use them :D
Tempest shouldn't be the *only* test for a project API. The projects
themselves need to take some ownership for their API getting full
coverage with in tree testing, including whatever microversion strategy
they are employing.
Agreed, but in-tree testing is also not feasible with too many version.
Even now we have 7 (1.0-1.6), if it continues, we'll have not less than
12 after L, 18 after M, etc. And we have to test every one of them for
regressions at least occasionally, provided that we don't start to
aggressively deprecated microversions. If we do start, then we'll start
breaking people even more often, than we should. E.g. if someone writes
a tool targeted at 1.1, and we deprecated 1.1 in M cycle, the tool will
break, though maybe it can actually work with new API.
I do not understand how in tree testing is not feasible. In tree you
have insights into all the branching that occurs within code so can very
clearly understand what paths aren't possible. It should be a lot more
straight forward than external black box testing where that can't be assume.
Exactly.
The whole *point* of microversions was to allow the APIs to evolve in a
backwards-compatible, structured and advertised way. The evolution of
the APIs response and request payloads should be tested fully for each
microversion added to the codebase -- in tree.
-jay
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
