-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
Vpcr Marvin test and some fixes for vprc #558
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
Nice one, @isoutham ! I will test it this week and also try to get someone else to have a look so we get the 2 LGTM needed to merge. Thanks! Cheers, |
|
Travis failed due timeout... so, that's not relevant and won't be taken into account when reviewing the PR: No output has been received in the last 10 minutes, this potentially indicates a stalled build or something wrong with the build itself.The build has been terminatedCheers, |
|
@isoutham @wilderrodrigues is there a way to trigger the build again? |
|
Only if something get pushed to the branch which generated the PR. Only 1 job out of 9 timed out... I wouldn't bother. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you remove this Services class and leverage the test data available @ tools/marvin/marvin/config/test_data.py file? You can refer to any tests available under test/integration/smoke/*.py on how to read test data from test_data.py config file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @sanju1010
@isoutham is currently on holidays and I would like to test and get this PR through before he is back.
I agree with the improvement you suggested, however it's not a blocking thing for the PR because it's only related to the marvin test.
Once his PR get's through, I will proceed with removing the Services class and use test_data.py instead. A new PR will be created afterwards.
Cheers,
Wilder
|
Hi @isoutham Unfortunately the test is failing. Details about my environment and results below: Management Server running on CentOS 7.1 It all starts fine: rVPC, tiers and VMs are created. After this... self.delete_nat_rules() All the tests work. However, the call to start the router doesnt self.start_router() The router never starts and the rules are not applied. I tried to give it a chance and restarted it manually (yes, deliberate action). After the router was running again, we got timeouts. I checked the IPs and found out they had no PF rules to port 22, although the ACLs were properly configured. I added the PF rules and after a while I got: ===SSH to Host 192.168.23.8 port : 22 SUCCESSFUL=== I also connected to the VM manually" Last login: Mon Jul 6 12:13:11 on ttys004 ls /bin boot dev etc home lib lib64 linuxrc lost+found media mnt opt proc root run sbin sys tmp usr var dateMon Jul 6 13:48:23 UTC 2015 Due to the previous failures, the test failed anyway. I will have a closer look at the changes and try to get it to work - will probably be part of our next Sprint. Cheers, |
|
@DaanHoogland @remibergsma @karuturi It LGTM. There is still 1 issue, that was also mentioned by Ian, but I'm fixing that. The details can be found here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8616 Since Ian is on holidays, I would like to get this PR merged so I can apply the fixes based on his work and create a separate PR. Would one of you help me with that? :) Thanks in advance. Cheers, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can we remove these lines and not leave code in comment?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1
Can I do all that in the new PR along with the fixes?
I mean... I will have 1 commit removing all the commented out lines. Is it okay?
:)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You can but you can also make a new pr inlcuding @isoutham code (with attribution intact) and add ammending commits
My worry is: will this break any existing tests. prod code is safe so I won't -1, just looking for loopholes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The idea is to get his PR merged, then I will apply the fixes, remove the commented lines, test and create a new PR.
No, the changes above won't break any existing tests. The redundant VPC has just 1 test till now, which tests the offering and creation of rVPC - it was added by @afornie. @isoutham is adding the second test from scratch, so that won't break anything.
Cheers,
Wilder
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok, clear. you got my LGTM
|
L reasonably GTM |
|
Thanks, @DaanHoogland Will proceed from here. |
…led (#558) * Fix bug missing Security Group in Advanced Zone 1. Add a new step security group in a zone with SG enabled. 2. Fix error of displaying sshKeypair data incorrectly * remove `this.hypervisor!=='KVM'` condition. Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav <[email protected]>
Improve logs in avoid planner Closes apache#558 See merge request scclouds/scclouds!223
A combined commit because otherwise it would not make sense.
If I commit the fixes alone there is not test to verify them
If I commit the tests alone it will not work because it found bugs
So both together
The test test_vpc_redundant.py is added (requires hardware) together with the following fixes.
The test still very occasionally fails with a (correct) double master detection. When I have worked out why, I will produce another PR. It appears to be a timing issue and could be tricky to find.