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 e2e #296

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 13, 2024
Merged

fix e2e #296

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 13, 2024

Conversation

jpinsonneau
Copy link
Contributor

@jpinsonneau jpinsonneau commented Mar 12, 2024

Description

Fix e2e:

  • gRPC case:
    • renamed to IfDirections and Interfaces and check for arrays
  • IPFIX case:
    • check for FlowDirection and Interface
    • updated flp dependency since it's involved in this e2e test

I would recommend to move away these tests to a new dedicated repo to avoid going back and forth updating dependencies.
These could also include console plugin cypress tests, operator deployment and CLI in future.

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

  • Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
  • Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
  • Does this PR require product documentation?
    • If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
  • Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
    • If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
  • Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
    • If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
  • QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
    • Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
    • Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
    • No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

@@ -66,8 +65,6 @@ func (bt *FlowCaptureTester) DoTest(t *testing.T) {
assert.Less(t, flow["Packets"], float64(10))
assert.Less(t, time.Since(asTime(flow["TimeFlowEndMs"])), 15*time.Second)
assert.Less(t, time.Since(asTime(flow["TimeFlowStartMs"])), 15*time.Second)

assert.NotEmpty(t, flow["Interface"])
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jpinsonneau jpinsonneau Mar 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't know why yet but I'm getting <nil> in IfDirections and Interfaces here 🤔

I'm investigating

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 12, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 36.74%. Comparing base (e9bf0d0) to head (b9179c7).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #296   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   36.74%   36.74%           
=======================================
  Files          42       42           
  Lines        3813     3813           
=======================================
  Hits         1401     1401           
  Misses       2334     2334           
  Partials       78       78           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 36.74% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@jpinsonneau jpinsonneau force-pushed the e2e_fix branch 7 times, most recently from be622c2 to 3843e45 Compare March 13, 2024 10:26
@msherif1234
Copy link
Contributor

msherif1234 commented Mar 13, 2024

/lgtm
assuming e2e will pass, also I am not sure why u updated FLP in this PR but have no prob with that

@jpinsonneau
Copy link
Contributor Author

/lgtm assuming e2e will pass, also I am not sure why u updated FLP in this PR but have no prob with that

@msherif1234 I have issues with IPFIX export, I wonder if it's broken 🤔
I get nil even if I check for old fields

@msherif1234
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 13, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

Approval requirements bypassed by manually added approval.

This pull-request has been approved by:

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

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit fde91cc into netobserv:main Mar 13, 2024
9 checks passed
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.

None yet

2 participants