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

test: migrate kubeflow-pipeline-e2e-test to GitHub Actions #10887

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 13, 2024

Conversation

hbelmiro
Copy link
Contributor

@hbelmiro hbelmiro commented Jun 11, 2024

Resolves: #10866

Description of your changes:

  • Added a new GitHub Action for e2e tests
  • Modified files as needed to work with the new GitHub Action
  • Removed existing e2e test templates from the Argo Workflow
  • Removed files that are no longer needed

PR to remove the corresponding test from GoogleCloudPlatform/oss-test-infra:

Checklist:

Copy link

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@hbelmiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test all

@hbelmiro hbelmiro marked this pull request as ready for review June 11, 2024 14:52
@hbelmiro hbelmiro changed the title WIP - test: migrate kubeflow-pipeline-e2e-test to GitHub Actions test: migrate kubeflow-pipeline-e2e-test to GitHub Actions Jun 11, 2024
@hbelmiro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@chensun can you please take a look?

uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
with:
name: kfp-backend-artifacts
path: /tmp/tmp.*/*
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

minor nitpick, needs a newline EoF.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done.

Copy link
Contributor

@DharmitD DharmitD left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@chensun could you take a look?

@google-oss-prow google-oss-prow bot removed the lgtm label Jun 11, 2024
Copy link

@hbelmiro: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
kubeflow-pipeline-upgrade-test 85ce24d link false /test kubeflow-pipeline-upgrade-test
kubeflow-pipeline-e2e-test 85ce24d link false /test kubeflow-pipeline-e2e-test

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

Copy link
Member

@chensun chensun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you so much, @hbelmiro !
This looks great!

@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ func (s *InitializationTest) SetupTest() {
return
}

err := test.WaitForReady(*namespace, *initializeTimeout)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we keep the namespace parameter? While it always defaults to "kubeflow" in case of KFP standalone deployment, it would be useful in testing multi-tenancy in full kubeflow deployment (though we don't have automated test for it yet).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually, WaitForReady does no longer depend on any namespace since now it invokes localhost:8888.

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@

# Common paths
GITHUB_REPO = 'kubeflow/pipelines'
BASE_DIR = os.path.join('/python/src/github.com/', GITHUB_REPO)
BASE_DIR = os.path.abspath('./')
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Possibly something wrong with the path here? I see an error message from https://github.com/kubeflow/pipelines/actions/runs/9468749205/job/26085814220?pr=10887

Config file with the same name not found, use default args:[Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/home/runner/work/pipelines/pipelines/test/sample-test/configs/sequential.config.yaml'

and somehow it didn't fail the test?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This isn't an error. When the file doesn't exist, the execution falls back to the default config. The file really doesn't exist.

The change in the BASE_DIR variable is because we are no longer running in a container. Instead, we are running locally within the GitHub Actions Runner. The old os.path.join('/python/src/github.com/', GITHUB_REPO) path doesn't exist in the runner.

Copy link
Member

@chensun chensun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
/approve

Thank you!

Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: chensun

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:

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

@google-oss-prow google-oss-prow bot merged commit 0c2bcf1 into kubeflow:master Jun 13, 2024
6 of 8 checks passed
@hbelmiro hbelmiro deleted the kubeflow-pipeline-e2e-test branch June 13, 2024 11:43
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.

Migrate Prow end to end tests to GH Actions
3 participants