-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
Add post upgrade check on capability #45010
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
Add post upgrade check on capability #45010
Conversation
|
@shellyyang1989, Interacting with pj-rehearseComment: Once you are satisfied with the results of the rehearsals, comment: |
b2e9f7c to
5189054
Compare
|
@shellyyang1989, Interacting with pj-rehearseComment: Once you are satisfied with the results of the rehearsals, comment: |
d6a9f8f to
fb93ae4
Compare
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.15-amd64-nightly-4.15-upgrade-from-stable-4.14-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
|
@jianlinliu @jinyunma @jiajliu @JianLi-RH Although it doesn't pass test yet, I need more eyes to make sure the logic makes sense. PTAL when you have time. Thank you! |
...p-registry/cucushift/upgrade/check/capability/cucushift-upgrade-check-capability-commands.sh
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
Shall we exit it as failure, if we are not very confident with that if the check is ready to move forward? Or should we always exit as passed, to check the log in early stage?
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 we exit 0, we will not get alert about the error so we won't know it failed until we check the log actively. Considering the test introduced critical bugs, I'm creating a Junit for it and thinking about to merge it to upgrade RP attribute. So we will be notified when the step fails
...p-registry/cucushift/upgrade/check/capability/cucushift-upgrade-check-capability-commands.sh
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
fb93ae4 to
e8461b8
Compare
...p-registry/cucushift/upgrade/check/capability/cucushift-upgrade-check-capability-commands.sh
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...p-registry/cucushift/upgrade/check/capability/cucushift-upgrade-check-capability-commands.sh
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
e8461b8 to
b4448f0
Compare
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.15-amd64-nightly-4.15-upgrade-from-stable-4.14-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
b4448f0 to
6eac59e
Compare
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.15-amd64-nightly-4.15-upgrade-from-stable-4.14-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
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.
source _version should be the last upgraded version in chain upgrade?
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.
This is a separate step which is out of chain upgrade step. So it's expected to be run once in chain upgrade. It validates the caps on the upgraded cluster compared to the initial cluster.
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.
do u mean, if it's 4.11-4.14 upgrade, it only do post check on cap for the last hop 4.14, while to compare with a 4.11 cluster? hmm, i wonder if the post check fail, is it easy for us to identify which hop got a wrong cap.
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.
Yeah, it's the drawback. But I don't prefer to move it to upgrade step as the step is complicated enough and it will be more complex with more caps introduced. It's not cvo only feature and all cap related components are supposed to ensure the functionality. I'm hoping other qe teams to treat it carefully in their e2e automation.
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.
do we have a proper job for a test against chain upgrade on such profile?
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.
We don't have chain upgrade job on caps profile currently. If someday we decide to add such job, we can update the step as needed, but I'm afraid that would be complex
...p-registry/cucushift/upgrade/check/capability/cucushift-upgrade-check-capability-commands.sh
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
819663f to
19e7dd0
Compare
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.15-amd64-nightly-4.15-upgrade-from-stable-4.14-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
19f69a6 to
86ae1a4
Compare
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.14-amd64-nightly-4.14-upgrade-from-stable-4.13-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
1 similar comment
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.14-amd64-nightly-4.14-upgrade-from-stable-4.13-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.15-amd64-nightly-4.15-upgrade-from-stable-4.14-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
...p-registry/cucushift/upgrade/check/capability/cucushift-upgrade-check-capability-commands.sh
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...p-registry/cucushift/upgrade/check/capability/cucushift-upgrade-check-capability-commands.sh
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
84717ec to
ab9741f
Compare
...p-registry/cucushift/upgrade/check/capability/cucushift-upgrade-check-capability-commands.sh
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
Looks good to me now. Only one question, can we run some test job to check if we really can catch OCPBUGS-22718 by the PR? I think we can run pj-rehearse job on |
bc23469 to
ae629f6
Compare
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.14-amd64-stable-4.14-upgrade-from-stable-4.13-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
3 similar comments
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.14-amd64-stable-4.14-upgrade-from-stable-4.13-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.14-amd64-stable-4.14-upgrade-from-stable-4.13-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
|
/pj-rehearse periodic-ci-openshift-openshift-tests-private-release-4.14-amd64-stable-4.14-upgrade-from-stable-4.13-aws-ipi-baselinecaps-none-f28 |
|
Rehearse job failed as expected. |
|
@shellyyang1989: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions 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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
0841f5a to
8186053
Compare
|
[REHEARSALNOTIFIER]
A total of 461 jobs have been affected by this change. The above listing is non-exhaustive and limited to 35 jobs. A full list of affected jobs can be found here Interacting with pj-rehearseComment: Once you are satisfied with the results of the rehearsals, comment: |
|
/lgtm |
|
/pj-rehearse ack |
|
cc @liangxia to review. |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jianlinliu, liangxia, shellyyang1989 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
@shellyyang1989 shall we also apply the checking to |
Sure. Didn't realize we have cap test on disconnected env |
Refers OCPQE-17567