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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[8.x](backport #6662) [CI] Fix throttled windows test failures #6694

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: 8.x
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[8.x](backport #6662) [CI] Fix throttled windows test failures #6694

wants to merge 3 commits into from
+12 −2

Conversation

mergify[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify mergify bot commented Feb 3, 2025

What does this PR do?

In some cases windows tests failures were throttled and the step was false-passing

Why is it important?

Checklist

  • I have read and understood the pull request guidelines of this project.
  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have made corresponding change to the default configuration files
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have added an entry in ./changelog/fragments using the changelog tool
  • I have added an integration test or an E2E test

Disruptive User Impact

How to test this PR locally

Related issues

Questions to ask yourself

  • How are we going to support this in production?
  • How are we going to measure its adoption?
  • How are we going to debug this?
  • What are the metrics I should take care of?
  • ...
This is an automatic backport of pull request #6662 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com).

@pazone @mergify
[CI] Fix throttled windows test failures (#6662)
8d16650 
* CI: Fifx throttled windows test failures

* Use LASTEXITCODE to catch test failures

* Update .buildkite/scripts/integration-tests.ps1

Co-authored-by: Doug W <[email protected]>

* Added  check to buildTestBinaries

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Doug W <[email protected]>

---------

Co-authored-by: Doug W <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Lind <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 87360e6)

# Conflicts:
#	.buildkite/scripts/integration-tests.ps1
@mergify mergify bot added backport conflicts There is a conflict in the backported pull request labels Feb 3, 2025
@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team as a code owner February 3, 2025 08:12
@mergify mergify bot assigned pazone Feb 3, 2025
@mergify Mergify
Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Feb 3, 2025

Cherry-pick of 87360e6 has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/8.x/pr-6662
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/8.x'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit 87360e698.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
	both modified:   .buildkite/scripts/integration-tests.ps1

no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally

@mergify Mergify
Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Feb 3, 2025

This pull request has not been merged yet. Could you please review and merge it @pazone? 🙏

@michalpristas
Copy link
Contributor

@pazone needs conflict resolution

@pierrehilbert
Copy link
Contributor

@pazone please don't forget to have a look here

@mergify Mergify
Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Feb 10, 2025

This pull request has not been merged yet. Could you please review and merge it @pazone? 🙏

@pierrehilbert
Copy link
Contributor

cc @cachedout

dliappis
dliappis approved these changes Feb 12, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@dliappis dliappis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Left a couple of comments that & to my understanding isn't needed unless we want to invoke a command stored in a variable.

LGTM since it's a backport

.buildkite/scripts/integration-tests.ps1
@@ -22,7 +22,11 @@ $env:AGENT_VERSION = $PACKAGE_VERSION
$env:SNAPSHOT = $true

echo "~~~ Building test binaries"
mage build:testBinaries
& mage build:testBinaries
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is & actually needed here? My understanding is that & is needed to run a command stored in a variable, so a direct execution would work.

.buildkite/scripts/integration-tests.ps1
try {
Get-Ess-Stack -StackVersion $PACKAGE_VERSION
Write-Output "~~~ Running integration test group: $GROUP_NAME as user: $env:USERNAME"
gotestsum --no-color -f standard-quiet --junitfile "${outputXML}" --jsonfile "${outputJSON}" -- -tags=integration -shuffle=on -timeout=2h0m0s "github.com/elastic/elastic-agent/testing/integration" -v -args "-integration.groups=$GROUP_NAME" "-integration.sudo=$TEST_SUDO"
& gotestsum --no-color -f standard-quiet --junitfile "${outputXML}" --jsonfile "${outputJSON}" -- -tags=integration -shuffle=on -timeout=2h0m0s "github.com/elastic/elastic-agent/testing/integration" -v -args "-integration.groups=$GROUP_NAME" "-integration.sudo=$TEST_SUDO"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is & actually needed here? My understanding is that & is needed to run a command stored in a variable, so direct execution would work.

This was referenced Feb 12, 2025
Open
Merged
@elastic-sonarqube Elastic SonarQube
Copy link

Quality Gate passed Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Fixed issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarQube

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@michalpristas michalpristas michalpristas approved these changes

@dliappis dliappis dliappis approved these changes

Assignees

@pazone pazone

Labels
backport conflicts There is a conflict in the backported pull request enhancement New feature or request skip-changelog Team:Ingest-EngProd
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@michalpristas @pierrehilbert @dliappis @pazone