I've uploaded a draft test plan up here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Test+Plans
Please reach out to me if any questions / feedback around this.
-Original Message-
From: Sowmya Krishnan [mailto:sowmya.krish...@citrix.com]
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 4:
Thanks Devdeep for proposing the feature.
I would like to take up testing for this feature. I'll be proposing a Test Plan
soon based on FS and will be uploading it shortly. I'll also include an
automation plan
Thanks,
Sowmya
-Original Message-
From: Devdeep Singh [mailto:devdeep.si...@c
> On March 24, 2015, 11:59 a.m., Sowmya Krishnan wrote:
> > Ship It!
>
> Sowmya Krishnan wrote:
> Pushed to master: 5f3f20a79ce658077dd527f390cabd5fa29814f2
> Please use GitHub pull request in future. Thanks.
Branch: refs/heads/master
Commit: ead41f9215546d38d29
> On March 24, 2015, 11:59 a.m., Sowmya Krishnan wrote:
> > Ship It!
Pushed to master: 5f3f20a79ce658077dd527f390cabd5fa29814f2
Please use GitHub pull request in future. Thanks.
- Sowmya
---
This is an automatically generat
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/30553/#review77549
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Sowmya Krishnan
On March 24, 2015, 8:48 a.m
reviews.apache.org/r/30553/#comment125635>
host_state can be removed here too
test/integration/component/test_escalations_hosts.py
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/30553/#comment125637>
These tests can be run without hardware as well I presume. If you think so,
can you change th
Hearty Congrats Saksham!
> -Original Message-
> From: sebgoa [mailto:run...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 12:18 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: [ANNOUNCE] Saksham Srivastava as committer
>
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked
> -Original Message-
> From: Pierre-Luc Dion [mailto:pd...@cloudops.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 6:57 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Release note of 4.3 questions
>
> I have question about supported Hypervisor for the Release-notes
>
> ref:
> http://docs.cloudstack
Thanks for the FS Koushik. I think these enhancements would greatly help in
enhancing our test suite, including performance tests.
I have few questions/comments:
1. You mention about simulating a fixed fault/ fixed failure. Does this mean
that when I configure simulator to fail it always keeps f
functional yet. If it gets implemented it'll be part of the plan.
> Please ignore If its already in the plan to be covered.
>
> Thanks,
> Sailaja.M
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sowmya Krishnan [mailto:sowmya.krish...@citrix.com]
> Sent: 13 November 2013 17:15
&g
Congratulations Sanjeev!
> -Original Message-
> From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 11:30 AM
> To: CloudStack Dev
> Subject: New Committer: Sanjeev Neelarapu
>
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked
> San
VM Expunge Interval
No new params or API change mentioned in the FS.
HA not supported. Network shutdown will be covered under Network restart cases.
> 20) HA testing Or Host Failover cases
>
HA not supported for this release. Failover will be covered under Host/Storage
in maintenance mode
I've drafted a test plan for Hyper-V support for areas to be tested:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Hyper-V+Test+Plan+for+4.3
based on the FS (https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/4hLVAQ).
Test cases are being drafted (not many new tests really, mostly consolidating
exi
t; I just checked and your permissions were already setup: Sowmya Krishnan
> (sowmyak)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
>
>
> On 5 nov. 2013, at 05:27, Sowmya Krishnan
> wrote:
>
> > sowmyak
Can someone please grant me edit access to wiki?
Username: sowmyak
Thanks,
Sowmya
> -Original Message-
> From: Santhosh Edukulla [mailto:nore...@reviews.apache.org] On Behalf Of
> Santhosh Edukulla
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 2:23 PM
> To: Rajesh Battala; Santhosh Edukulla; Sowmya Krishnan
> Cc: Prasanna Santhanam; cloudstack
> Subject: Re:
view27877
---
On Oct. 28, 2013, 7:03 a.m., Sowmya Krishnan wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://revie
Battala, Santhosh Edukulla, and Sowmya
Krishnan.
Changes
---
Uploaded latest diff
Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-4776
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4776
Repository: cloudstack-git
Description
---
Created tests for Netscaler as external LB provider in VPC
Used ddt to achieve
ormation, i will invite him\her as well.
> >
> > santhosh
>
> Sowmya Krishnan wrote:
> Sure. Test plan is here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/xIzlAQ
> I had done the testing for the feature and dev was done by Rajesh(already
> added as reviewer for this patch)
>
part of the LB rule?
From: Nguyen Anh Tu [mailto:ng.t...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 10:57 AM
To: Sowmya Krishnan
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Review Request 14628: AutoScaling without NetScaler
2013/10/17 Sowmya Krishnan
mailto:sowmya.krish...@citrix.com>>
T
This is interesting... Got couple of questions, if I may,
What is the reason for the cluster limitation? Does it mean Autoscaling
conditions are evaluated for the LB within the cluster only?
Looks like the new counters to be used for non-netscaler configurations are
cpu, memory.
> ---
--
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/14426/#review27068
-------
On Oct. 15, 2013, 11:30 a.m., Sowmya Krishnan wrote:
>
> --
Test create network outside cidr range of VPC ... ok
Test create network inside cidr range of VPC ... ok
Test create network inside cidr range of VPC ... ok
Test create network overlapping cidr range of VPC ...
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/14557/#review27018
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Sowmya Krishnan
On Oct. 11, 2013, 8:31 a.m
Answer inline...
> -Original Message-
> From: Nguyen Anh Tu [mailto:ng.t...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 12:14 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Autoscaling
>
> Dear Rajesh,
>
> Apologize for delay in response.
>
> You mean the netscaler api's used to crea
reate network inside cidr range of VPC ... ok
Test create network inside cidr range of VPC ... ok
Test create network overlapping cidr range of VPC ...
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
Ilya,
Is this similar to this issue:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4636
Fix for this has gone in 4.2-forward and master. As stated in the bug, this
could happen if more than one thread tries to process the same host post MS
restart.
> -Original Message-
> From: Musa
--marvin-config=datacenter.cfg --load
test/integration/component/test_netscaler_nw_off.py:TestAddMultipleNSDiffZone
Test add netscaler devices in different zones ... ok
--
Ran 1 test in 20.605s
OK
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
-----Original Message-
> From: Sowmya Krishnan [mailto:sowmya.krish...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 11:51 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Should VPC VR go to Stop after all VMs are deleted?
>
> When all instances in a VPC are deleted, I find the V
When all instances in a VPC are deleted, I find the VPC router isn't stopped
unlike normal isolated networks. Is this expected?
I think it is, since initially when we create a VPC, when no VMs are created
yet, we still start up the VPC VR.
But we have a test (test_vpc_network. test_01_wait_net
Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4679 for the API issue.
> -Original Message-
> From: Alena Prokharchyk
> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 9:58 PM
> To: Sowmya Krishnan; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: Venkata SwamyBabu Budumuru
> Subject: Re:
ring what is the use case for exposing
createVPCOffering at all? Can we not stick to the default offerings of VPC
already provided?
> -Original Message-
> From: Alena Prokharchyk
> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 10:54 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Sowmya Krishnan
r 12, 2013 10:54 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Sowmya Krishnan
> Cc: Venkata SwamyBabu Budumuru
> Subject: Re: Marvin tests for VPC - why create VPC offering?
>
>
> On 9/12/13 10:12 AM, "Rajesh Battala" wrote:
>
> >My observations are
> >1. VPC
And the diff is here:
https://github.com/ksowmya/cloudstack-1/commit/9c141570bd6d1f6783f0d7a8a986d46523895988
> -Original Message-
> From: Sowmya Krishnan [mailto:sowmya.krish...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 8:11 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> S
Data driven tests [1] help in generating more tests with less code. Useful for
cases where we have lot of similar tests to be carried out with different
configurations (run same tests with different network offerings for example)
I've tried this out for VPC tests. We have same set of tests need
> See inline, there seems to be a bug in the design.
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 05:53:45AM +, Sowmya Krishnan wrote:
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
> > > Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 11:07 AM
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 11:07 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Marvin tests for VPC - why create VPC offering?
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 05:15:16AM +,
I find for most of the VPC tests we create a new VPC Offering which provides
almost the same set of services as the "Default VPC Offering" already available
by default. We also have a separate function to create this offering, enabling
it and then create a VPC using this offering. I wonder why d
So to get around this limitation, should we be looking at making appropriate
changes to deployDataCenter.py to not try to add NS device if it's not
supplied? The test would take care anyway of adding the device and configuring
the provider.
Thoughts?
> -Original Message-
> From: Soheil
org/r/13889/diff/
Testing
---
Tested on both new MS and an existing one.
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
-
Tested the scripts locally and they are all passing.
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
://reviews.apache.org/r/13803/diff/
Testing
---
Tested locally - test passes
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
passes
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
nkata SwamyBabu Budumuru
> Cc: Rayees Namathponnan; Sowmya Krishnan; cloudstack
> Subject: Re: Review Request 13680: CLOUDSTACK-3927, CLOUDSTACK-3928 Fix
> to add/remove NS devices in setupClass/tearDownClass
>
>
> ---
>
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13680/diff/
Testing
---
Tested locallly
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
then
the test potentially could fail looking at the wrong NS. That's the reason for
adding NS independently in each test.
Please let me know if any comments.
- Sowmya
---
This is an automatically generated e-m
test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb_algo.py 477bd69
test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb_sticky.py 1edfd7b
tools/marvin/marvin/integration/lib/common.py 4f5acef
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13680/diff/
Testing
---
Tested locallly
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
Thanks Radhika.
Minor corrections under: 15.27.11.1.2. Creating a Network Offering for External
LB
1. Please edit " To have internal LB support on VPC," to "To have external LB
support on VPC,"
2. Under "Supported Services", choose Load Balancer Provider as Netscaler or
VpcVirtualRouter
3. Load
/r/13633/diff/
Testing
---
Tested scripts locally.
File Attachments
Patch
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2013/08/18/0001-CLOUDSTACK-3927-CLOUDSTACK-3928-Fix-NS-scripts-to-ad_1.patch
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
> -Original Message-
> From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 12:42 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Minor changes to Marvin tests for Netscaler
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 04:27:19AM +, Sowmya Kri
I am planning to modify some of the Netscaler tests (test_netscaler_lb_algo,
test_netscaler_lb_sticky, test_netscaler_lb) in our integration suite to
include adding of NS device in the setUpClass(). And remove the device in
tearDownClass(). Currently this is not consistently done across all test
://reviews.apache.org/r/13009/diff/
Testing
---
Tested locally. Script is now passing and cleanup of all accounts done.
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
offering altogether from cleanup.
> >
> > Network offerings currently do not delete if the account's network
> > deployed from that offering isn't shutdown in time. Since offerings are
> > lightweight and do not consume physical/virtual resources, we should d
ell. So we aren't really
waiting on network offering cleanup.
- Sowmya
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13009/#review24082
------
cleanup of all accounts done.
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
Agreed, test issues showing up in blockers/critical is confusing.
I guess, for product issues found through automated tests, we could use Issue
type = Bug and component = Automation in addition to the actual component where
the bug is found.
> -Original Message-
> From: Prasanna Santha
s an expunge of the all resources. Suppose
> someone made a mistake and removed all users from an account and cs
> automatically deleted the account and automatically cleaned out the resources.
> Not a good idea. Better to specifically delete the account.
>
> --Alex
&
> -Original Message-
> From: Sowmya Krishnan [mailto:sowmya.krish...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 7:05 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Do we delete an account after all users are deleted?
>
>
>
> > -Original M
> -Original Message-
> From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 6:55 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Do we delete an account after all users are deleted?
>
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 12:19:31PM +,
Do we perform any cleanup of an account if all users in that account are
deleted? I don't find that is the current behavior.
I was going through test_accounts.py and figured that's one of the tests.
Here's the description of that test:
# Validate the following
# 1. Remove both the users
RB doesn’t accept the patch. Keeps failing. Here's the patch:
From 02238e6903d3d399d402886513efd6cd2664696a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sowmya Krishnan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 22:29:10 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] Add wait while Netscaler recognizes service to be up
---
test/integration/comp
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
Repository: cloudstack-git
Description
---
Fixed more account objects. Fixes CLOUDSTACK-3693
Diffs
-
test/integration/component/test_egress_rules.py c8b3eee
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/12865/diff/
Testing
---
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
locally and it passes now.
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
Repository: cloudstack-git
Description
---
Fixed account objects for all tests
Diffs
-
test/integration/component/test_netscaler_nw_off.py c328f48
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/12859/diff/
Testing
---
Locally, script passes
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
This gives better results (specifically for the test script issues):
"""
project = CloudStack AND issuetype = Bug and (status = Open or status =
Reopened or status = "Ready To Review") and (summary ~ Automation OR
component = Automation) order by key desc """
> -Original Message-
> F
Repository: cloudstack-git
Description
---
Fix ostype to the correct value.
Diffs
-
test/integration/component/test_netscaler_nw_off.py 6a51666
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/12755/diff/
Testing
---
tested locally. test script passed
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
/test_netscaler_lb.py 146b4c6
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/12641/diff/
Testing
---
Tested locally and the script passes
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
/diff/
Testing
---
Tested locally and the script passes
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/12631/diff/
Testing
---
Tested locally and the script passes
Thanks,
Sowmya Krishnan
-git
Description
---
Fix typo in TestAddMultipleNSDiffZone.test_add_mul_netscaler_diff_zone
Diffs
-
test/integration/component/test_netscaler_nw_off.py a5fe5b1
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/12625/diff/
Testing
---
Tested locally and test script passed
Thanks,
Sowmya
Configurations look ok.
Could you check to see if there are destroyVirtualMachine API calls in the
management server logs? If not then the condition for Scale down is probably
not getting hit.
To find out if the condition is being hit in Netscaler, run "nsconmsg" in the
shell. When scale down
Congratulations Sangeetha!
> -Original Message-
> From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 11:49 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Sangeetha Hariharan
>
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack
Hearty Congrats Swamy!!
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 2:53 AM
> To:
> Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Venkata Swamy
>
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked
> Venkata Swamy t
Many congrats Sailaja!!
> -Original Message-
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 2:51 AM
> To:
> Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Sailaja Mada
>
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked
> Sailaja Mada to
I am planning to execute performance test runs for 4.2 and I've posted an
initial draft here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Performance+Test+Plan+for+4.2
Please take a look and let me know your feedback.
A sample of the earlier performance test runs done during 4.1 (spec
> -Original Message-
> From: Rajesh Battala
> Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 3:15 PM
> To: Sowmya Krishnan; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [ACS42][QA] Test Plan for Support of Netscaler as external LB in
> VPC
>
> There are two things, upgrading VPC, a
> Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 1:54 PM
> To: Sowmya Krishnan; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [ACS42][QA] Test Plan for Support of Netscaler as external LB in
> VPC
>
> Please see my comments in-line. Please let me know your comments.
>
> > -Original Messa
I am planning to take up test execution for the feature : "Support for
Netscaler as External Load Balancer in VPC"
I've written some test cases for the same. Please review and let me know if any
comments.
Here are Test cases:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Support+for+Net
79 matches
Mail list logo
