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

Refactor test workflow to separate bwc tests #3070

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 21, 2024

Conversation

Swiddis
Copy link
Collaborator

@Swiddis Swiddis commented Oct 11, 2024

Description

Makes linux test failures more visible by splitting out the failing BWC tests to their own action. I'm not sure how to fix the BWC tests, I've been told they start failing semi-regularly due to external factors so it seems like it's a wise decision to keep it separate from more reliable tests.

Related Issues

N/A

Check List

  • New functionality includes testing.
  • New functionality has been documented.
  • New functionality has javadoc added.
  • New functionality has a user manual doc added.
  • API changes companion pull request created.
  • Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff.
  • Public documentation issue/PR created.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

Signed-off-by: Simeon Widdis <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Simeon Widdis <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Simeon Widdis <[email protected]>
Copy link
Collaborator

@MaxKsyunz MaxKsyunz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@Swiddis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Swiddis commented Oct 18, 2024

Have spent several hours trying to debug the actual BWC test failures but it's a bit outside my skillset right now -- anyone have pointers?

Copy link
Collaborator

@noCharger noCharger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

let's create an issue to track BWC seperately. thx!

@Swiddis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Swiddis commented Oct 21, 2024

#3089

@Swiddis Swiddis merged commit f4def31 into opensearch-project:main Oct 21, 2024
16 of 17 checks passed
@opensearch-trigger-bot
Copy link
Contributor

The backport to 2.x failed:

The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 128

To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal:

# Navigate to the root of your repository
cd $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
# Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add ../.worktrees/sql/backport-2.x 2.x
# Navigate to the new working tree
pushd ../.worktrees/sql/backport-2.x
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport/backport-3070-to-2.x
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 f4def3111020bf5147bffce666e9efbb5738820e
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport/backport-3070-to-2.x
# Go back to the original working tree
popd
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove ../.worktrees/sql/backport-2.x

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.x and the compare/head branch is backport/backport-3070-to-2.x.

@Swiddis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Swiddis commented Oct 21, 2024

Skipping backport on this since the tests are failing so heavily there that the benefit would be near-zero. main is comparatively much more "on the front lines" for upcoming BWC issues

@Swiddis Swiddis mentioned this pull request Oct 23, 2024
7 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
infrastructure Changes to infrastructure, testing, CI/CD, pipelines, etc.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants