-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 116
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
satellite and capsule installation improvements #12961
Conversation
trigger: test-robottelo |
trigger: test-robottelo |
@@ -1395,14 +1413,29 @@ def test_capsule_installation(sat_default_install, cap_ready_rhel, default_org): | |||
assert sat_default_install.api.Capsule().search( | |||
query={'search': f'name={cap_ready_rhel.hostname}'} | |||
)[0] | |||
|
|||
# no errors/failures in journald | |||
result = cap_ready_rhel.execute( |
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.
non-blocking. Considering there are a lot of assertions added here you could add a function for common capsule installation assertions like we have for satellite.
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.
I agree. These assertions should to be put into separate function. I currently kept them in the testcase, because it's still only one place where these assertions are used. But as soon as they are used in another testcases (e.g. when ipv6 install tests are implemented) they should be separated.
I even had another idea. There are not so many differences in assertions for satellite and capsule, so there might be just one "common_installation_assertions" with intersection of these assertions.
I'm not sure which idea is better, so let's keep it for later discussion and iprovements.
@@ -1361,6 +1378,7 @@ def sat_non_default_install(module_sat_ready_rhels): | |||
|
|||
@pytest.mark.e2e | |||
@pytest.mark.tier1 | |||
@pytest.mark.pit |
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.
Great to see this inclusion, @rmynar! Please get in touch with me after this PR is merged. I would like to do a test execution of the PIT pipeline to see how the test behaves in it.
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.
Please change the marker to pit_client
since the bare pit
marker does not exist. The client scenario marker must be used instead of the server one since we do not change the content_host
configs in the server scenario contrary to the client scenario where we change the config to spawn. Therefore we would get a released RHEL instead of a non-released one.
trigger: test-robottelo |
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.
ack pending passing prt
trigger: test-robottelo |
previous prt failure was caused by product bug, so i entered a bz and made the assertion conditional depending on bz status. current prt passed successfully |
@@ -1361,6 +1378,7 @@ def sat_non_default_install(module_sat_ready_rhels): | |||
|
|||
@pytest.mark.e2e | |||
@pytest.mark.tier1 | |||
@pytest.mark.pit |
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.
Please change the marker to pit_client
since the bare pit
marker does not exist. The client scenario marker must be used instead of the server one since we do not change the content_host
configs in the server scenario contrary to the client scenario where we change the config to spawn. Therefore we would get a released RHEL instead of a non-released one.
|
||
# no errors/failures in journald | ||
result = cap_ready_rhel.execute( | ||
r'journalctl -q --no-pager -b -p err -u "pulpcore" -u "foreman" -u "foreman-proxy" -u "httpd" -u "postgresql" -u "pulpcore-api" -u "pulpcore-worker"' |
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.
If I am not wrong, you did not cover all services in this list. I would recommend you store all service names in a list that could be placed in constants and generate the command based on it. The list should ideally contain all services that satellite-maintain checks in its service status
check.
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.
non-blocking ^
trigger: test-robottelo |
To the one who will be merging it: please squash and merge so Auto Cherry-pick picks all changes. |
* satellite and capsule installation improvements * check logs with journal instead of syslog * check logs for errors only * skip assertion if BZ is open * fix pit marker * improved logs testing (cherry picked from commit c4cef13)
* satellite and capsule installation improvements * check logs with journal instead of syslog * check logs for errors only * skip assertion if BZ is open * fix pit marker * improved logs testing (cherry picked from commit c4cef13)
* satellite and capsule installation improvements * check logs with journal instead of syslog * check logs for errors only * skip assertion if BZ is open * fix pit marker * improved logs testing
Applying changes from Component evaluation