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

Update Batch integration test to run in series #436

Merged

Conversation

nick-stroud
Copy link
Collaborator

Without this failure of one test will kill the parallel test and leave its resources up.

Submission Checklist

  • Have you installed and run this change against pre-commit? (pre-commit install)
  • Are all tests passing? (make tests)
  • Have you written unit tests to cover this change?
  • Is unit test coverage still above 80%?
  • Have you updated all applicable documentation?
  • Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?

@tpdownes
Copy link
Member

@nick-stroud does this logic also apply to tools/cloud-build/daily-tests/integration-group-3.yaml?

@tpdownes tpdownes assigned nick-stroud and unassigned tpdownes Jul 21, 2022
@nick-stroud
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@nick-stroud does this logic also apply to tools/cloud-build/daily-tests/integration-group-3.yaml?

I believe so. When one task fails it kills all other parallel tasks without allowing for a graceful cleanup. In group 3 you will see that omnia waits for monitoring and luster waits for omnia. It looks like packer does not follow that pattern. Not sure if that is on purpose or a mistake.

@nick-stroud nick-stroud assigned tpdownes and unassigned nick-stroud Jul 21, 2022
@tpdownes
Copy link
Member

I agree with this and think I just observed it while testing #435. Can you make the appropriate change in both builds?

@tpdownes tpdownes assigned nick-stroud and unassigned tpdownes Jul 21, 2022
@nick-stroud
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I agree with this and think I just observed it while testing #435. Can you make the appropriate change in both builds?

Are you referring to group 3 and packer. I am less familiar with that one and was not sure if parallelism is intentional. Generally I would prefer to handle in separate PR since this has already been reviewed.

@nick-stroud nick-stroud assigned tpdownes and unassigned nick-stroud Jul 21, 2022
Copy link
Member

@tpdownes tpdownes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please create a task to address group 3

@tpdownes
Copy link
Member

No need here to wait on #435

@tpdownes tpdownes assigned nick-stroud and unassigned tpdownes Jul 21, 2022
@nick-stroud nick-stroud merged commit 38909dd into GoogleCloudPlatform:develop Jul 21, 2022
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.

2 participants