Skip to content
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

Fix flaky propagator test (case19_rep_policy_placement_test) #222

Conversation

yiraeChristineKim
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@yiraeChristineKim yiraeChristineKim force-pushed the ACM-11256 branch 2 times, most recently from 0937dbe to d0eb2af Compare May 16, 2024 19:02
@yiraeChristineKim yiraeChristineKim changed the title (No review)Fix flaky propagator test (case19_rep_policy_placement_test) Fix flaky propagator test (case19_rep_policy_placement_test) May 16, 2024
@yiraeChristineKim yiraeChristineKim marked this pull request as ready for review May 16, 2024 19:03
@yiraeChristineKim yiraeChristineKim requested a review from mprahl May 16, 2024 19:03
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested a review from dhaiducek May 16, 2024 19:03
@yiraeChristineKim
Copy link
Contributor Author

Or I can reset Reconciler before each It

@mprahl
Copy link
Member

mprahl commented May 16, 2024

/hold for discussion

mprahl
mprahl previously approved these changes May 16, 2024
Copy link
Member

@mprahl mprahl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm good with removing this test as I don't see much value in it.

Copy link
Member

@dhaiducek dhaiducek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm also fine with taking it out since the metrics haven't really gotten a lot of attention. It could be interesting if the metrics really take off because of some change and this test detects it, but I think that seems unlikely at this point.

)[0]
afterTotal, err = strconv.Atoi(afterString)
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())
Expect(afterTotal - beforeTotal).Should(Equal(2))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the one I was thinking could alternatively just be:

Expect(afterTotal - beforeTotal).Should(Equal(Or(2,3)))

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It should be 2. because managed1, managed2 added. This happens only "minimum"

Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())
Expect(afterTotal - beforeTotal).Should(Equal(2))
})
It("should reconcile twice when managed1 and managed2 are created by placementRule", func() {
Copy link
Member

@dhaiducek dhaiducek May 16, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't have a strong opinion, but if we keep the test should it just be this test node that gets removed?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You mean just remove the test after line 166?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As an alternative, yes, but @mprahl indicated the tests don't have a lot of value, which I'm fine with, so removing it is also fine with me.

.gitignore Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Remove case 19 that is checking reconcile numbers because this test is flaky, and hard to reset the metrics, we already verified our reconcile work properly
Signed-off-by: yiraeChristineKim <[email protected]>
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm label May 22, 2024
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented May 22, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mprahl, yiraeChristineKim

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
  • OWNERS [mprahl,yiraeChristineKim]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@mprahl
Copy link
Member

mprahl commented May 22, 2024

/unhold

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit bceafae into open-cluster-management-io:main May 22, 2024
13 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants