Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] pingtest vs tempest

[Ben Nemec]

On 04/17/2017 10:51 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote:
We haven't got much feedback from TripleO core reviewers, who are
usually more involved on this topic. I'll give a chance to let them
talk because we take some actions based on the feedback brought in
this discussion.

I started to write a response last week and realized I didn't have a 
coherent recommendation, but here are my semi-organized thoughts:

The pingtest was created for two main reasons.  First, it's fast.  Less 
than three minutes in most CI jobs.  Second, it's simple.  We've added a 
bunch of stuff for resource cleanup and such, but in essence it's four 
commands: glance image-create, neutron net-create, neutron 
subnet-create, and heat stack-create.  It would be hard to come up with 
a useful test that is meaningfully simpler.

Tempest isn't really either of those things.  According to another 
message in this thread it takes around 15 minutes to run just the smoke 
tests.  That's unacceptable for a lot of our CI jobs.  It also tends to 
require a lot more configuration in my experience.

All that said, the simplicity of the ping test means it isn't well 
suited to testing more complex things, and I don't think we should try 
to extend it to do so.  Tempest already provides an extensible, 
pluggable framework for complex testing.

Personally I don't want to see the ping test go away completely.  I like 
having a stupid simple and fast way to sanity check a deployment.  If we 
deleted the ping test I would probably just maintain a script that does 
the same basic thing out of tree.

However, if we're starting to duplicate Tempest functionality for 
scenario tests or advanced features then I do think we need to figure 
out how to integrate Tempest for that test coverage.  I will note that I 
don't think the requirement to have a Heat resource for things we test 
in TripleO is necessarily a bad thing, but I don't think that's the only 
reason this is being discussed so I'll leave it at that.

There's also a separate issue of API coverage.  It's true that the ping 
test only provides a bare minimum of coverage for the services, but as I 
discussed above that's largely a function of job runtime.  We simply 
can't run full API tests in many of our CI jobs.  Maybe we could in the 
basic multinode jobs, but the updates, upgrades, and ovb jobs are all 
too long already.  In those the best we can hope to do is a minimal 
sanity check.  I'm thinking one Tempest test per service, max.  Less 
than that if we can find tests that exercise multiple services in one 
(like the ping test does).

That's my brain dump on this.  Do with it what you will. :-)


Thanks,

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 4:26 AM, Ravi Sekhar Reddy Konda
<ravisekhar.ko...@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Diarmuid,

Even in our setup Sravanthi by mistake has deleted all the ports
we are trying to bring up again, if it is done today wil ping you and schedule 
again

Otherwise i will schedule for Monday

Thanks,
Ravi
----- Original Message -----
From: jtale...@redhat.com
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, jkilp...@redhat.com
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 4:15:58 PM GMT +05:30 Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, 
New Delhi
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] pingtest vs tempest

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Sagi Shnaidman <sshna...@redhat.com> wrote:
HI,

I think Rally or Browbeat and other performance oriented solutions won't
serve our needs, because we run TripleO CI on virtualized environment with
very limited resources. Actually we are pretty close to full utilizing these
resources when deploying openstack, so very little is available for test.
It's not a problem to run tempest API tests because they are cheap - take
little time, little resources, but also gives little coverage. Scenario test
are more interesting and gives us more coverage, but also takes a lot of
resources (which we don't have sometimes).

Sagi,
In my original message I mentioned a "targeted" test, I should
explained that more. We could configure the specific scenario so that
the load on the virt overcloud would be minimal. Justin Kilpatrick
already have Browbeat integrated with TripleO Quickstart[1], so there
shouldn't be much work to try this proposed solution.


It may be useful to run a "limited edition" of API tests that maximize
coverage and don't duplicate, for example just to check service working
basically, without covering all its functionality. It will take very little
time (i.e. 5 tests for each service) and will give a general picture of
deployment success. It will cover fields that are not covered by pingtest as
well.

I think could be an option to develop a special scenario tempest tests for
TripleO which would fit our needs.

I haven't looked at Tempest in a long time, so maybe its functionality
has improved. I just saw the opportunity to integrate Browbeat/Rally
into CI to test the functionality of OpenStack services, while also
capturing performance metrics.

Joe

[1] 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_openstack_browbeat_tree_master_ci-2Dscripts&d=DwIGaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=rFCQ76TW5HZUgA7b20ApVcXgXru6mvz4fvCm1_H6w1k&m=c7EeLf1PQSsV2XbWBhv6CWOzUFDRnDiIheN4lDKjyq8&s=Z0jGFw40ezDmSb3F6ns5SXRvacH6AgU0TK5dKBSRgEs&e=


Thanks


On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Emilien Macchi <emil...@redhat.com> wrote:

Greetings dear owls,

I would like to bring back an old topic: running tempest in the gate.

== Context

Right now, TripleO gate is running something called pingtest to
validate that the OpenStack cloud is working. It's an Heat stack, that
deploys a Nova server, some volumes, a glance image, a neutron network
and sometimes a little bit more.
To deploy the pingtest, you obviously need Heat deployed in your
overcloud.

== Problems:

Although pingtest has been very helpful over the last years:
- easy to understand, it's an Heat template, like an OpenStack user
would do to deploy their apps.
- fast: the stack takes a few minutes to be created and validated

It has some limitations:
- Limitation to what Heat resources support (example: some OpenStack
resources can't be managed from Heat)
- Impossible to run a dynamic workflow (test a live migration for example)

== Solutions

1) Switch pingtest to Tempest run on some specific tests, with feature
parity of what we had with pingtest.
For example, we could imagine to run the scenarios that deploys VM and
boot from volume. It would test the same thing as pingtest (details
can be discussed here).
Each scenario would run more tests depending on the service that they
run (scenario001 is telemetry, so it would run some tempest tests for
Ceilometer, Aodh, Gnocchi, etc).
We should work at making the tempest run as short as possible, and the
close as possible from what we have with a pingtest.

2) Run custom scripts in TripleO CI tooling, called from the pingtest
(heat template), that would run some validations commands (API calls,
etc).
It has been investigated in the past but never implemented AFIK.

3) ?

I tried to make this text short and go straight to the point, please
bring feedback now. I hope we can make progress on $topic during Pike,
so we can increase our testing coverage and detect deployment issues
sooner.

Thanks,
--
Emilien Macchi

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=rFCQ76TW5HZUgA7b20ApVcXgXru6mvz4fvCm1_H6w1k&m=c7EeLf1PQSsV2XbWBhv6CWOzUFDRnDiIheN4lDKjyq8&s=W6U8XqdHMEh8UmMqQtZNoLw8eWnRvoFgYl-sKUgkiBY&e=




--
Best regards
Sagi Shnaidman

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=rFCQ76TW5HZUgA7b20ApVcXgXru6mvz4fvCm1_H6w1k&m=c7EeLf1PQSsV2XbWBhv6CWOzUFDRnDiIheN4lDKjyq8&s=W6U8XqdHMEh8UmMqQtZNoLw8eWnRvoFgYl-sKUgkiBY&e=


__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_openstack-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=rFCQ76TW5HZUgA7b20ApVcXgXru6mvz4fvCm1_H6w1k&m=c7EeLf1PQSsV2XbWBhv6CWOzUFDRnDiIheN4lDKjyq8&s=W6U8XqdHMEh8UmMqQtZNoLw8eWnRvoFgYl-sKUgkiBY&e=

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev




__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev