Skip to content

Ignore warnings related to types deprecation in REST tests. #35395

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 13, 2018
Merged

Ignore warnings related to types deprecation in REST tests. #35395

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
6e1bd95
Ignore warnings related to types deprecation in REST tests.
jtibshirani Nov 8, 2018
6ad699c
Move the check for types warnings into its own else/ if case.
jtibshirani Nov 13, 2018
2dd2b53
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into rest-tests
jtibshirani Nov 13, 2018
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
19 changes: 11 additions & 8 deletions test/framework/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/test/rest/yaml/section/DoSection.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -293,18 +293,21 @@ void checkWarningHeaders(final List<String> warningHeaders, final Version master
if (matches) {
final String message = matcher.group(1);
// noinspection StatementWithEmptyBody
if (masterVersion.before(Version.V_7_0_0)
if ((masterVersion.before(Version.V_7_0_0)
&& message.equals("the default number of shards will change from [5] to [1] in 7.0.0; "
+ "if you wish to continue using the default of [5] shards, "
+ "you must manage this on the create index request or with an index template")) {
+ "you must manage this on the create index request or with an index template"))
|| message.startsWith("[types removal]")) {
Copy link
Member

@jasontedor jasontedor Nov 13, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The change itself is fine, I just have one comment about how it's structured. Rather than an if with an or between the two types of warnings that we are ignoring, I would rather see separate cases. For example

diff --git a/test/framework/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/test/rest/yaml/section/DoSection.java b/test/framework/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/test/rest/yaml/section/DoSection.java
index c21d80602c9..7d01c6af20c 100644
--- a/test/framework/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/test/rest/yaml/section/DoSection.java
+++ b/test/framework/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/test/rest/yaml/section/DoSection.java
@@ -293,18 +293,19 @@ public class DoSection implements ExecutableSection {
             if (matches) {
                 final String message = matcher.group(1);
                 // noinspection StatementWithEmptyBody
-                if ((masterVersion.before(Version.V_7_0_0)
+                if (masterVersion.before(Version.V_7_0_0)
                         && message.equals("the default number of shards will change from [5] to [1] in 7.0.0; "
                         + "if you wish to continue using the default of [5] shards, "
-                        + "you must manage this on the create index request or with an index template"))
-                    || message.startsWith("[types removal]")) {
+                        + "you must manage this on the create index request or with an index template")) {
                     /*
-                     * We ignore two classes of warning headers:
-                     * - The default number of shards warning will come back in the vast majority of our tests that
-                     * create an index when running against an older master. Rather than rewrite our tests to assert
-                     * this warning header, we assume that it is expected.
-                     * - We skip warnings related to types deprecation so that we can continue to run the many
-                     * mixed-version tests that used typed APIs.
+                     * This warning header will come back in the vast majority of our tests that create an index when running against an
+                     * older master. Rather than rewrite our tests to assert this warning header, we assume that it is expected.
+                     */
+                } else //noinspection StatementWithEmptyBody
+                    if (masterVersion.before(Version.V_7_0_0) && message.startsWith("[types removal]")) {
+                    /*
+                     * This warning header will come back in the tests that use typed APIs. Rather than rewrite our tests to assert this
+                     * warning header, we assume that it is expected.
                      */
                 } else if (expected.remove(message) == false) {
                     unexpected.add(header);

I am not tied to this at all, though.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@jtibshirani jtibshirani Nov 13, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @jasontedor for your suggestion. I initially avoided that structure because of the awkward else noinspection ... \n if, but I now think it's important for clarity because in this format, you misread the boolean statements! The types-related check does not include masterVersion.before(Version.V_7_0_0).

Copy link
Member

@jasontedor jasontedor Nov 13, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oops, I indeed misread the parentheses; I double checked even but it’s exactly because I had to strain across multiple lines to match them up I propose the change. 😇

/*
* This warning header will come back in the vast majority of our tests that create an index when running against an
* older master. Rather than rewrite our tests to assert this warning header, we assume that it is expected.
* We ignore two classes of warning headers:
* - The default number of shards warning will come back in the vast majority of our tests that
* create an index when running against an older master. Rather than rewrite our tests to assert
* this warning header, we assume that it is expected.
* - We skip warnings related to types deprecation so that we can continue to run the many
* mixed-version tests that used typed APIs.
*/
} else {
if (expected.remove(message) == false) {
unexpected.add(header);
}
} else if (expected.remove(message) == false) {
Copy link
Contributor

@markharwood markharwood Nov 13, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shouldn't this be indented a level so the close bracket lines up with the if it relates to?

Copy link
Member

@jasontedor jasontedor Nov 13, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don’t think so, think of it as a multi-line if:

 if (a
     || b
     || c) {
   // do something
 }

Copy link
Contributor

@markharwood markharwood Nov 13, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ignore me. We don't indent chains of else ifs and this just threw me because the else is separated from the if by a comment.

unexpected.add(header);
Copy link
Member

@javanna javanna Nov 9, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I wonder if this change requires some adapting on language clients test runners. I think that some clients don't support headers, hence they can't support the warning feature, so this does not affect them (they already skip all the tests around warnings and don't fail if warnings are returned). Not sure what other clients that support headers do though. If they do fail when a warning is returned, which they should, their runner should be adapted.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@jtibshirani jtibshirani Nov 9, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @javanna for the note, I'll make sure to tag the clients team on these PRs.

}
} else {
unmatched.add(header);
Expand Down
10 changes: 10 additions & 0 deletions test/framework/src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/test/rest/yaml/section/DoSectionTests.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -128,6 +128,16 @@ public void testWarningHeaders() {
}
}

public void testIgnoreTypesWarnings() {
String legitimateWarning = DeprecationLogger.formatWarning("warning");
String typesWarning = DeprecationLogger.formatWarning("[types removal] " +
"The endpoint /{index}/{type}/_count is deprecated, use /{index}/_count instead.");

DoSection section = new DoSection(new XContentLocation(1, 1));
section.setExpectedWarningHeaders(singletonList("warning"));
section.checkWarningHeaders(Arrays.asList(legitimateWarning, typesWarning), Version.CURRENT);
}

public void testParseDoSectionNoBody() throws Exception {
parser = createParser(YamlXContent.yamlXContent,
"get:\n" +
Expand Down