Uploaded image for project: 'Couchbase C client library libcouchbase'
  1. Couchbase C client library libcouchbase
  2. CCBC-1197

Add testing for 6.5 with DP enabled

    XMLWordPrintable

Details

    • Task
    • Status: Resolved
    • Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • None
    • 3.0.2
    • None
    • None
    • 1

    Description

      As enabling the developer features in 6.5 significantly impacts the behaviour of the server and SDKs in terms of performing operations, the SDKs should explicitly test against the 6.5 server with preview mode enabled in integration tests.

      Note that there are significant known issues with the use of services such as N1QL when developer preview is enabled and thus it is expected that each SDK has some method to signal whether the developer preview is enabled in tests (this flag would disable N1QL for 6.5 as an example).

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          No reviews matched the request. Check your Options in the drop-down menu of this sections header.

          Activity

            david.kelly David Kelly added a comment -

            Adding the 4th server to the integration tests makes the code too large, and Jenkins complains. So – we need to pull that out and refactor so the declarative pipeline makes a call that returns those stages. That's non-trivial – but not so bad. I don't want to effect our ability to release by breaking the nightlies, so I'll push into a branch, and make a new target that uses it perhaps.

            david.kelly David Kelly added a comment - Adding the 4th server to the integration tests makes the code too large, and Jenkins complains. So – we need to pull that out and refactor so the declarative pipeline makes a call that returns those stages. That's non-trivial – but not so bad. I don't want to effect our ability to release by breaking the nightlies, so I'll push into a branch, and make a new target that uses it perhaps.

            Probably makes sense to just update the pipeline to use the new setup we came up with for pipelines.

            brett19 Brett Lawson added a comment - Probably makes sense to just update the pipeline to use the new setup we came up with for pipelines.
            david.kelly David Kelly added a comment -

            Probably so – but the work to do so isn't insignificant.  I thought I'd start by doing what I did in the python integration tests and just have a function return the integration test steps.  If that works (seems it does, but finishing the testing now), at least we have something now.  And, that is a scripted pipeline it returns, so the changes to that are small when porting the rest.  

            david.kelly David Kelly added a comment - Probably so – but the work to do so isn't insignificant.  I thought I'd start by doing what I did in the python integration tests and just have a function return the integration test steps.  If that works (seems it does, but finishing the testing now), at least we have something now.  And, that is a scripted pipeline it returns, so the changes to that are small when porting the rest.  
            david.kelly David Kelly added a comment -

            Added 6.6 and 7.0 as well.  So, the servers are:

            5.5.6, 6.0.4, 6.5.1, 6.5.1-DP, 6.6.0-7737, 7.0.0-2147.  Seems like a lot, but Arun was hoping for 6.6 and 7.0 tests, so what the hell.

             

             

            Now...  I did this in the most expedient fashion possible.  I didn't re-do the entire pipeline, I just made a function to spit out a scripted pipeline for the integration tests.  That keeps Jenkins from complaining about the size of the pipeline.  

            We really should redo to make it all scripted, and so on.  But that would probably have bled into next week, and I need to be on other things.

            david.kelly David Kelly added a comment - Added 6.6 and 7.0 as well.  So, the servers are: 5.5.6, 6.0.4, 6.5.1, 6.5.1-DP, 6.6.0-7737, 7.0.0-2147.  Seems like a lot, but Arun was hoping for 6.6 and 7.0 tests, so what the hell.     Now...  I did this in the most expedient fashion possible.  I didn't re-do the entire pipeline, I just made a function to spit out a scripted pipeline for the integration tests.  That keeps Jenkins from complaining about the size of the pipeline.   We really should redo to make it all scripted, and so on.  But that would probably have bled into next week, and I need to be on other things.

            People

              david.kelly David Kelly
              brett19 Brett Lawson
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              2 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Gerrit Reviews

                  There are no open Gerrit changes

                  PagerDuty