[ovirt-devel] Re: OST's basic suite UI sanity tests optimization

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 4:55 AM Marcin Sobczyk <msobczyk(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Hi, > On 3/4/19 7:07 PM, Greg Sheremeta wrote: > > Hi, > > Thanks for trying to improve the tests! > > I'm reluctant to give up Firefox sanity tests on every commit, though. In > fact, I wanted to add Edge and Safari, because those are also supported > browsers. Just today a Firefox only issue was reported, so they are > valuable. > > Was the Firefox-only issue detected by basic suite or some other tests? > It was reported by a developer. Because GWT compiles permutations per browser, and each browser therefore loads completely separate JavaScript payloads, it's just too easy for it to break in one browser and be fine in the other, so I'm really not ok to remove Firefox. If Admin Portal was React where there is a single JavaScript payload that's shared among all browsers, then I'd consider it. > > Did you consider either leaving a grid up permanently or perhaps using a > third party like saucelabs? > > I did consider simply having our own grid for the OST. > There's even a thread somewhere on ovirt-devel, where someone found OST > trying to connect to one of my VMs in Tel Aviv, where my own grid was > running :D > I couldn't make a public demo though - OST executors couldn't see my VM > in tlv. > > This approach has 2 big flaws: > > - it requires quite a lot of resources for the grid to always be > there for us > > What about Saucelabs or another third party free tool? > > - it makes OST running times somehow undeterministic - situations, > where WebDriver has to wait for Selenium hub/nodes to be free, will > probably take place > > The way I see basic suite's UI sanity tests, is that they're exactly what > they're called - sanity tests. > We do trivial checks like "can we log in to the webadmin site", "can we > go to 'virtual machines' sub-page". > I'm not in favor of dropping these completely - I think they make sense, > but I also think we can live with a trimmed-down version that saves a lot > of time. > As I said - AFAIK QE have their own Selenium grid, where they run more > complex tests on the UI. > Yes, OST basic_ui_sanity tests aren't "compatibility" tests. We're not checking pixels or look. They are super simple "does the app load" tests, are very valuable, and we're not dropping them. Greg Regards, Marcin > > > > Best wishes, > Greg > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2019, 11:39 AM Marcin Sobczyk <msobczyk(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> *TL; DR* Let's cut the running time of '008_basic_ui_sanity.py' by more >> than 3 minutes by sacrificing Firefox and Chrome screenshots in favor of >> Chromium. >> During the OST hackathon in Brno this year, I saw an opportunity to >> optimize basic UI sanity tests from basic suite. >> The way we currently run them, is by setting up a Selenium grid using 3 >> docker containers, with a dedicated network... that's insanity! (pun >> intended). >> Let's a look at the running time of '008_basic_ui_sanity.py' scenario ( >> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/view/oVirt%20system%20tests/job/ovirt-system-te...): >> >> >> 01:31:50 @ Run test: 008_basic_ui_sanity.py: >> 01:31:50 nose.config: INFO: Ignoring files matching ['^\\.', '^_', >> '^setup\\.py$'] >> 01:31:50 # init: >> 01:31:50 # init: Success (in 0:00:00) >> 01:31:50 # start_grid: >> 01:34:05 # start_grid: Success (in 0:02:15) >> 01:34:05 # initialize_chrome: >> 01:34:18 # initialize_chrome: Success (in 0:00:13) >> 01:34:18 # login: >> 01:34:27 # login: Success (in 0:00:08) >> 01:34:27 # left_nav: >> 01:34:45 # left_nav: Success (in 0:00:18) >> 01:34:45 # close_driver: >> 01:34:46 # close_driver: Success (in 0:00:00) >> 01:34:46 # initialize_firefox: >> 01:35:02 # initialize_firefox: Success (in 0:00:16) >> 01:35:02 # login: >> 01:35:11 # login: Success (in 0:00:08) >> 01:35:11 # left_nav: >> 01:35:29 # left_nav: Success (in 0:00:18) >> 01:35:29 # cleanup: >> 01:35:36 # cleanup: Success (in 0:00:06) >> 01:35:36 # Results located at >> /dev/shm/ost/deployment-basic-suite-master/008_basic_ui_sanity.py.junit.xml >> 01:35:36 @ Run test: 008_basic_ui_sanity.py: Success (in 0:03:45) >> >> Starting the Selenium grid takes 2:15 out of 3:35 of total running time! >> >> I've investigated a lot of approaches and came up with something like >> this: >> >> - install 'chromium-headless' package on engine VM >> - download 'chromedriver' and 'selenium hub' jar and deploy them in >> '/var/opt/' on engine's VM >> - run 'selenium.jar' on engine VM from '008_basic_ui_sanity.py' by >> using Lago's ssh >> - connect to the Selenium instance running on the engine in >> '008_basic_ui_sanity.py' >> - make screenshots >> >> This series of patches represent the changes: >> https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/q/topic:selenium-on-engine+(status:open+OR+sta... >> . >> This is the new running time (https://jenkins.ovirt.org/view/oVirt >> system tests/job/ovirt-system-tests_manual/4195/): >> >> 20:13:26 @ Run test: 008_basic_ui_sanity.py: >> 20:13:26 nose.config: INFO: Ignoring files matching ['^\\.', '^_', >> '^setup\\.py$'] >> 20:13:26 # init: >> 20:13:26 # init: Success (in 0:00:00) >> 20:13:26 # make_screenshots: >> 20:13:27 * Retrying (Retry(total=2, connect=None, read=None, >> redirect=None, status=None)) after connection broken by >> 'NewConnectionError('<urllib3.connection.HTTPConnection object at >> 0x7fdb6004f8d0>: Failed to establish a new connection: [Errno 111] >> Connection refused',)': /wd/hub >> 20:13:27 * Retrying (Retry(total=1, connect=None, read=None, >> redirect=None, status=None)) after connection broken by >> 'NewConnectionError('<urllib3.connection.HTTPConnection object at >> 0x7fdb6004fa10>: Failed to establish a new connection: [Errno 111] >> Connection refused',)': /wd/hub >> 20:13:27 * Retrying (Retry(total=0, connect=None, read=None, >> redirect=None, status=None)) after connection broken by >> 'NewConnectionError('<urllib3.connection.HTTPConnection object at >> 0x7fdb6004fb50>: Failed to establish a new connection: [Errno 111] >> Connection refused',)': /wd/hub >> 20:13:28 * Redirecting http://192.168.201.4:4444/wd/hub -> >> http://192.168.201.4:4444/wd/hub/static/resource/hub.html >> 20:14:02 # make_screenshots: Success (in 0:00:35) >> 20:14:02 # Results located at >> /dev/shm/ost/deployment-basic-suite-master/008_basic_ui_sanity.py.junit.xml >> 20:14:02 @ Run test: 008_basic_ui_sanity.py: Success (in 0:00:35) >> (The 'NewConnectionErrors' is waiting for Selenium hub to be up and >> running, I can silence these later). >> And the screenshots are here: >> https://jenkins.ovirt.org/view/oVirt%20system%20tests/job/ovirt-system-te... >> >> *The pros:* >> >> - we cut the running time by more than 3 minutes >> >> *The cons:* >> >> - we don't get Firefox or Chrome screenshots - we get Chromium >> screenshots (although AFAIK, QE has much more Selenium tests which cover >> both Firefox and Chrome) >> - we polute the engine VM with 'chromium-headless' package and deps >> (in total: 'chromium-headless', 'chromium-common', 'flac-libs' and >> 'minizip'), although we can remove these after the tests >> >> *Some design choices explained:* >> >> Q: Why engine VM? >> >> A: Because the engine VM already has 'X11' libs. We could install >> 'chromium-headless' (and even other browsers) on our Jenkins executors, but >> that would mess them up a lot. >> >> Q: Why Chromium? >> >> A: Because it has a separate 'headless' package. >> >> Q: Why not use 'chromedriver' RPM in favor of >> https://chromedriver.storage.googleapis.com Chromedriver builds? >> >> A: Because the RPM version pulls a lot of extra dependencies even on the >> engine VM ('gtk3', 'cairo' etc.). Builds from the URL are the offical >> Google Chromedriver builds, they contain a single binary, and they work for >> us. >> >> *What still needs to be polished with the patches:* >> >> - Currently 'setup_engine_selenium.sh' script downloads each time >> 'selenium.jar' and 'chromedriver.zip' (even with these downloads we get >> much faster set-up times) - we should bake these into the engine VM image >> template. >> - 'selenium_hub_running' function in 'selenium_on_engine.py' is >> hackish - an ability to run an ssh command with a context manager (and >> auto-terminate on it exits) should be part of Lago. Can be refactored. >> >> Questions, comments, reviews are welcome. >> >> Regards, Marcin >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Devel mailing list -- devel(a)ovirt.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)ovirt.org >> Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/ >> oVirt Code of Conduct: >> https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/ >> List Archives: >> https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/message/RLB2KSNJS4Y... >> > -- GREG SHEREMETA SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER - TEAM LEAD - RHV UX Red Hat NA <https://www.redhat.com/> gshereme(a)redhat.com IRC: gshereme <https://red.ht/sig>