Skip to content

improvement(nemesis_tests): Make tests independant from production Nemesis #10912

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 27, 2025

Conversation

pehala
Copy link
Contributor

@pehala pehala commented May 16, 2025

  • Add NemesisRegistry tests
    • Replaces and extends existing tests for selectors and such
  • Split Nemesis tests into 3 modules
    • test_registry - Tests NemesisRegistry directly
    • test_sisyphus - Tests Sisyphus and its respective functionality
    • test_specific_nemesis - Tests implementations of specific nemesis
      • Only tests that are still dependant on the implementation
  • Introduce new class hierarchy for tests only
  • Fixes Make test_nemesis independent from Nemesis disruption methods #10592

Testing

  • locally

PR pre-checks (self review)

  • I added the relevant backport labels
  • I didn't leave commented-out/debugging code

@pehala pehala requested a review from fruch May 16, 2025 12:03
@pehala pehala added the backport/none Backport is not required label May 16, 2025
@pehala pehala force-pushed the fix_nemesis_tests branch from f416c86 to 81c1a90 Compare May 16, 2025 12:03
@pehala pehala force-pushed the fix_nemesis_tests branch from 81c1a90 to 8289545 Compare May 23, 2025 15:32
pehala added 2 commits May 26, 2025 11:43
- Move them to separate directory
- Use custom subclass hierarchies to make them less dependent on the implementation
- Add NemesisRegistry tests
- Fixes scylladb#10592
@pehala pehala force-pushed the fix_nemesis_tests branch from 8289545 to 296f36c Compare May 26, 2025 09:43
@pehala pehala requested a review from a team May 26, 2025 09:46
Copy link
Contributor

@fruch fruch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@soyacz
Copy link
Contributor

soyacz commented May 26, 2025

no backports needed?

@pehala
Copy link
Contributor Author

pehala commented May 26, 2025

no backports needed?

We did not backport nemesis registry changes so probably not. Only release where it could make sense is 2025.2, as that was branched after the registry was merged

@soyacz
Copy link
Contributor

soyacz commented May 27, 2025

no backports needed?

We did not backport nemesis registry changes so probably not. Only release where it could make sense is 2025.2, as that was branched after the registry was merged

I see #10502 was backported to 2025.1 and as you mention it is in 2025.2

@pehala pehala added backport/2025.1 backport/2025.2 and removed backport/none Backport is not required labels May 27, 2025
@pehala
Copy link
Contributor Author

pehala commented May 27, 2025

no backports needed?

We did not backport nemesis registry changes so probably not. Only release where it could make sense is 2025.2, as that was branched after the registry was merged

I see #10502 was backported to 2025.1 and as you mention it is in 2025.2

You are right, I remembered it wrong, sorry. I added backports to both 2025.1 and 2025.2

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.

Make test_nemesis independent from Nemesis disruption methods
4 participants