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

Improve test coverage #13

Open
1 of 2 tasks
sandreim opened this issue Feb 25, 2022 · 4 comments
Open
1 of 2 tasks

Improve test coverage #13

sandreim opened this issue Feb 25, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@sandreim
Copy link
Collaborator

sandreim commented Feb 25, 2022

What needs to be done

  • Implement basic functionality tests to achieve some basic/sane level of coverage.
  • Fix test flakyness. Tests are using external nodes for RPC calls via subxt that can be unreachable. We should spawn a dev node using a docker image.
@AndreiEres AndreiEres added meta and removed stale labels Jun 23, 2023
This was referenced Jun 28, 2023
@AndreiEres
Copy link
Collaborator

@sandreim, about the test flakiness.

In tests we use external nodes for RPC calls that can be unreachable. To solve it we could spawn a dev node using a docker image.

After a few experiments with the CI team, we found that a dev node needs a couple of minutes to be ready, even with warp sync. Considering that our RPC tests are mostly smoke-like, I'd rather restart failed tests than set up a slow pipeline.

What do you think?

@sandreim
Copy link
Collaborator Author

sandreim commented Jul 6, 2023

We could spin up a small zombienet network to test this, just 1 validator and 1 parachain should do it.

@AndreiEres
Copy link
Collaborator

These tests are metadata sensitive and should be rewritten using dynamic API
api::tests::get_backing_groups
api::tests::get_occupied_cores
api::tests::get_scheduled_paras

@AndreiEres
Copy link
Collaborator

Since #445 we spawn a zombienet in the test stage instead of querying the real chain.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants