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

Add envtest testing docs to extend cronjob example #1521

Merged
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
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
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion docs/book/src/SUMMARY.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -26,6 +26,8 @@

- [Deploying the cert manager](./cronjob-tutorial/cert-manager.md)
- [Deploying webhooks](./cronjob-tutorial/running-webhook.md)

- [Writing tests](./cronjob-tutorial/writing-tests.md)

- [Epilogue](./cronjob-tutorial/epilogue.md)

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -73,7 +75,7 @@
- [Artifacts](./reference/artifacts.md)
- [Writing controller tests](./reference/writing-tests.md)

- [Using envtest in integration tests](./reference/testing/envtest.md)
- [Using envtest in integration tests](./reference/envtest.md)

- [Metrics](./reference/metrics.md)

Expand Down
7 changes: 2 additions & 5 deletions docs/book/src/cronjob-tutorial/epilogue.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
# Epilogue

By this point, we've got a pretty full-featured implementation of the
CronJob controller, and have made use of most of the features of
KubeBuilder.
CronJob controller, made use of most of the features of
KubeBuilder, and written tests for the controller using envtest.

If you want more, head over to the [Multi-Version
Tutorial](/multiversion-tutorial/tutorial.md) to learn how to add new API
Expand All @@ -11,9 +11,6 @@ versions to a project.
Additionally, you can try the following steps on your own -- we'll have
a tutorial section on them Soon™:

- writing unit/integration tests (check out [envtest][envtest])
- adding [additional printer columns][printer-columns] `kubectl get`

[envtest]: https://godoc.org/sigs.k8s.io/controller-runtime/pkg/envtest

[printer-columns]: /reference/generating-crd.md#additional-printer-columns
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,206 @@
/*
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It might not be part of this PR, however, IMO would be nice we add a new block of tests in the Travis to verify the book testdata and then, in this call this test implemented here to be sure that all is fine.

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'd be happy to take a look into this :)

Ideally, we should have one `<kind>_conroller_test.go` for each controller scaffolded and called in the `test_suite.go`.
So, let's write our example test for the CronJob controller (`cronjob_controller_test.go.`)
*/

/*

Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
You may obtain a copy of the License at

http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
limitations under the License.
*/
// +kubebuilder:docs-gen:collapse=Apache License

/*
As usual, we start with the necessary imports. We also define some utility variables.
*/
package controllers

import (
"context"
"reflect"
"time"

. "github.com/onsi/ginkgo"
. "github.com/onsi/gomega"
batchv1 "k8s.io/api/batch/v1"
batchv1beta1 "k8s.io/api/batch/v1beta1"
v1 "k8s.io/api/core/v1"
metav1 "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1"
"k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/types"
gabbifish marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

cronjobv1 "tutorial.kubebuilder.io/project/api/v1"
)

gabbifish marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
// +kubebuilder:docs-gen:collapse=Imports

/*
The first step to writing a simple integration test is to actually create an instance of CronJob you can run tests against.
Note that to create a CronJob, you’ll need to create a stub CronJob struct that contains your CronJob’s specifications.

Note that when we create a stub CronJob, the CronJob also needs stubs of its required downstream objects.
Without the stubbed Job template spec and the Pod template spec below, the Kubernetes API will not be able to
create the CronJob.
*/
var _ = Describe("CronJob controller", func() {

// Define utility constants for object names and testing timeouts/durations and intervals.
const (
CronjobName = "test-cronjob"
CronjobNamespace = "test-cronjob-namespace"
JobName = "test-job"

timeout = time.Second * 10
duration = time.Second * 10
interval = time.Millisecond * 250
)

Context("When updating CronJob Status", func() {
It("Should increase CronJob Status.Active count when new Jobs are created", func() {
By("By creating a new CronJob")
ctx := context.Background()
gabbifish marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
cronJob := &cronjobv1.CronJob{
TypeMeta: metav1.TypeMeta{
APIVersion: "batch.tutorial.kubebuilder.io/v1",
Kind: "CronJob",
},
ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{
Name: CronjobName,
Namespace: CronjobNamespace,
},
Spec: cronjobv1.CronJobSpec{
Schedule: "1 * * * *",
JobTemplate: batchv1beta1.JobTemplateSpec{
Spec: batchv1.JobSpec{
// For simplicity, we only fill out the required fields.
Template: v1.PodTemplateSpec{
Spec: v1.PodSpec{
// For simplicity, we only fill out the required fields.
Containers: []v1.Container{
{
Name: "test-container",
Image: "test-image",
},
},
RestartPolicy: v1.RestartPolicyOnFailure,
},
},
},
},
},
}
Expect(k8sClient.Create(ctx, cronJob)).Should(Succeed())

/*
After creating this CronJob, let's check that the CronJob's Spec fields match what we passed in.
Note that, because the k8s apiserver may not have finished creating a CronJob after our `Create()` call from earlier, we will use Gomega’s Eventually() testing function instead of Expect() to give the apiserver an opportunity to finish creating our CronJob.

`Eventually()` will repeatedly run the function provided as an argument every interval seconds until
(a) the function’s output matches what’s expected in the subsequent `Should()` call, or
(b) the number of attempts * interval period exceed the provided timeout value.

In the examples below, timeout and interval are Go Duration values of our choosing.
*/

cronjobLookupKey := types.NamespacedName{Name: CronjobName, Namespace: CronjobNamespace}
createdCronjob := &cronjobv1.CronJob{}

// We'll need to retry getting this newly created CronJob, given that creation may not immediately happen.
Eventually(func() bool {
err := k8sClient.Get(ctx, cronjobLookupKey, createdCronjob)
if err != nil {
return false
}
return true
}, timeout, interval).Should(BeTrue())
// Let's make sure our Schedule string value was properly converted/handled.
Expect(createdCronjob.Spec.Schedule).Should(Equal("1 * * * *"))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can you add a comment here or something explaining this? I'm assuming it's a sanity test for when you have pruning turned on on the API server (CRD v1 or CRD v1beta1 w/ conversion), but it's worth pointing out.

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 as much a sanity test for pruning as it is a check to ensure that our CronJob spec Schedule field matches the parameters we passed in. (I don't think Schedule is supposed to ever get pruned?) Please let me know if I misunderstood something!

Copy link
Contributor

@DirectXMan12 DirectXMan12 Jun 22, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think i'm just not understanding the failure condition you're testing for. The two failure modes I can imaging are conversion screwing up something during round-tripping (which I forgot about when leaving the comment here) or pruning removing the field. Otherwise, "field passed in" == "field read" should be ensured by the apiserver. If not, somethings terribly wrong with the apiserver (hence referring to it above as a "sanity test").

Copy link
Contributor Author

@gabbifish gabbifish Jun 25, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This failure condition was originally created to check for "field passed in" == "field read" (which is ensured by the APIserver). Pruning shouldn't happen here, given that Schedule is a required CronJob Spec field. The idea for adding this came from some conversations @camilamacedo86 and I had earlier (see #1521 (comment)). The conversion point you bring up is still valid and potentially worth leaving the test for, though.

Given that the consistency of a created object and its input spec is ensured by/tested in the apiserver, I think it could make sense to just delete this check or add a comment mentioning testing schedule string conversion behavior--what do you think?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@gabbifish gabbifish Jun 28, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I went with the second option (add extra comment to clarify that this tests the conversion of the Schedule string). I think this should be ready for final review? :)

/*
Now that we've created a CronJob in our test cluster, the next step is to write a test that actually tests our CronJob controller’s behavior.
Let’s test the CronJob controller’s logic responsible for updating CronJob.Status.Active with actively running jobs.
We’ll verify that when a CronJob has a single active downstream Job, its CronJob.Status.Active field contains a reference to this Job.

First, we should get the test CronJob we created earlier, and verify that it currently does not have any active jobs.
We use Gomega's `Consistently()` check here to ensure that the active job count remains 0 over a duration of time.
*/
By("By checking the CronJob has zero active Jobs")
Consistently(func() (int, error) {
err := k8sClient.Get(ctx, cronjobLookupKey, createdCronjob)
if err != nil {
return -1, err
}
return len(createdCronjob.Status.Active), nil
}, duration, interval).Should(Equal(0))
/*
Next, we actually create a stubbed Job that will belong to our CronJob, as well as its downstream template specs.
We set the Job's status's "Active" count to 2 to simulate the Job running two pods, which means the Job is actively running.

We then take the stubbed Job and set its owner reference to point to our test CronJob.
This ensures that the test Job belongs to, and is tracked by, our test CronJob.
Once that’s done, we create our new Job instance.
*/
By("By creating a new Job")
testJob := &batchv1.Job{
ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{
Name: JobName,
Namespace: CronjobNamespace,
},
Spec: batchv1.JobSpec{
Template: v1.PodTemplateSpec{
Spec: v1.PodSpec{
// For simplicity, we only fill out the required fields.
Containers: []v1.Container{
{
Name: "test-container",
Image: "test-image",
},
},
RestartPolicy: v1.RestartPolicyOnFailure,
},
},
},
Status: batchv1.JobStatus{
Active: 2,
},
}

// Note that your CronJob’s GroupVersionKind is required to set up this owner reference.
kind := reflect.TypeOf(cronjobv1.CronJob{}).Name()
gvk := cronjobv1.GroupVersion.WithKind(kind)

controllerRef := metav1.NewControllerRef(createdCronjob, gvk)
testJob.SetOwnerReferences([]metav1.OwnerReference{*controllerRef})
Expect(k8sClient.Create(ctx, testJob)).Should(Succeed())
/*
Adding this Job to our test CronJob should trigger our controller’s reconciler logic.
After that, we can write a test that evaluates whether our controller eventually updates our CronJob’s Status field as expected!
*/
By("By checking that the CronJob has one active Job")
Eventually(func() ([]string, error) {
err := k8sClient.Get(ctx, cronjobLookupKey, createdCronjob)
gabbifish marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
if err != nil {
return nil, err
}

names := []string{}
for _, job := range createdCronjob.Status.Active {
names = append(names, job.Name)
}
return names, nil
}, timeout, interval).Should(ConsistOf(JobName), "should list our active job %s in the active jobs list in status", JobName)
})
})

})

/*
After writing all this code, you can run `go test ./...` in your `controllers/` directory again to run your new test!
*/
Loading