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 Kafka cleaner & Azure Location creation flakies #2097

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: development/2.6
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

williamlardier
Copy link
Contributor

@williamlardier williamlardier commented Jun 24, 2024

  • Fix Kafkacleaner test, with dynamic sleep based on the partitions, and comparing the low property evolution to be more robust.
  • Add kubernetes clients for observing zenko status and data service deployments (cloudserver & backbeat)
  • In 2.8+ branches, fix the azure tests creating locations by using these new functions.

Change in 2.8+: 032cb7e

@williamlardier williamlardier marked this pull request as ready for review June 24, 2024 07:52
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jun 24, 2024

Hello williamlardier,

My role is to assist you with the merge of this
pull request. Please type @bert-e help to get information
on this process, or consult the user documentation.

Available options
name description privileged authored
/after_pull_request Wait for the given pull request id to be merged before continuing with the current one.
/bypass_author_approval Bypass the pull request author's approval
/bypass_build_status Bypass the build and test status
/bypass_commit_size Bypass the check on the size of the changeset TBA
/bypass_incompatible_branch Bypass the check on the source branch prefix
/bypass_jira_check Bypass the Jira issue check
/bypass_peer_approval Bypass the pull request peers' approval
/bypass_leader_approval Bypass the pull request leaders' approval
/approve Instruct Bert-E that the author has approved the pull request. ✍️
/create_pull_requests Allow the creation of integration pull requests.
/create_integration_branches Allow the creation of integration branches.
/no_octopus Prevent Wall-E from doing any octopus merge and use multiple consecutive merge instead
/unanimity Change review acceptance criteria from one reviewer at least to all reviewers
/wait Instruct Bert-E not to run until further notice.
Available commands
name description privileged
/help Print Bert-E's manual in the pull request.
/status Print Bert-E's current status in the pull request TBA
/clear Remove all comments from Bert-E from the history TBA
/retry Re-start a fresh build TBA
/build Re-start a fresh build TBA
/force_reset Delete integration branches & pull requests, and restart merge process from the beginning.
/reset Try to remove integration branches unless there are commits on them which do not appear on the source branch.

Status report is not available.

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jun 24, 2024

Request integration branches

Waiting for integration branch creation to be requested by the user.

To request integration branches, please comment on this pull request with the following command:

/create_integration_branches

Alternatively, the /approve and /create_pull_requests commands will automatically
create the integration branches.

@williamlardier
Copy link
Contributor Author

/create_integration_branches

@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Jun 24, 2024
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jun 24, 2024

Integration data created

I have created the integration data for the additional destination branches.

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/2.5

You can set option create_pull_requests if you need me to create
integration pull requests in addition to integration branches, with:

@bert-e create_pull_requests

The following options are set: create_integration_branches

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jun 24, 2024

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • 2 peers

The following options are set: create_integration_branches


// Topic is cleaned, we don't need to check it anymore
// Ensure we're accessing the correct partition details
const lowOffsetIncreased = parseInt(partition.low) >
Copy link
Collaborator

@KillianG KillianG Jun 24, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why do we need to parseInt here and not below?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am not done with the pr yet, jira transitioned it in review because I created the PR (not in draft to have the integration branches), but I still have some parts to improve, especially on the 2.8 branch
I will let you know when it's done

// So the status might not be updated immediately after the overlay is applied.
// So, this function will first wait till we detect a reconciliation
// (deploymentInProgress = true), and then wait for the status to be available
const timeout = 15 * 60 * 1000;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why 15 minutes ? can we make it configurable ? The default TO in cucumber is 100 seconds, should we make it 100 seconds as well by default ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we can access the timeout from the test by default, by passing the test object in the function, so that we wait just what's needed

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So, to answer the question: the functions will have the timeout as a parameter, but the default remains 15min; the reason is that the service restart can take up to 3~4min as per my observations, and sometimes longer, if some tests are running at high frequency, blocking kube from restarting the pods quickly (as they are still handling requests).
So, the steps reyling on these functions will need specific timeouts.

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jun 24, 2024

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • 2 peers

The following options are set: create_integration_branches

@williamlardier williamlardier force-pushed the bugfix/ZENKO-4833-fix branch 2 times, most recently from 9538041 to dd79b07 Compare June 25, 2024 07:01
@williamlardier
Copy link
Contributor Author

/force_reset

@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Jun 25, 2024
@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Jun 25, 2024
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jun 25, 2024

Reset complete

I have successfully deleted this pull request's integration branches.

The following options are set: create_integration_branches

@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Jun 25, 2024
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jun 25, 2024

Integration data created

I have created the integration data for the additional destination branches.

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/2.5

You can set option create_pull_requests if you need me to create
integration pull requests in addition to integration branches, with:

@bert-e create_pull_requests

The following options are set: create_integration_branches

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Jun 25, 2024

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • 2 peers

The following options are set: create_integration_branches

@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Jun 25, 2024
@@ -342,8 +339,13 @@ Then('kafka consumed messages should not take too much place on disk', { timeout
.filter(t => (t.includes(this.parameters.InstanceID) &&
!ignoredTopics.some(e => t.includes(e))));

timeoutID = setTimeout(() => {
assert.fail('Kafka cleaner did not clean the topics within the expected time');
}, (topics.length || 1) * checkInterval * 5); // Timeout after 5 Kafka cleaner intervals
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why do we increase the timeout by the number of topics?

  • the timeout is based on kafka-cleaner period, and we check every (remaining) topic on each iteration: so number of topics should not increase the timeout...
  • move the timeout here prevents catching issues with kafka connection (listTopics() call above) which could get stuck...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I adapted the logic, it's true we do not need to wait for each topic, but for sure we needed to wait more, as the cleaning might be slower in the CI due to other tests jeopardizing resources temporarily...

@williamlardier
Copy link
Contributor Author

/wait

@williamlardier
Copy link
Contributor Author

/approve

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants