Re: pgAdmin IV API test cases patch - Mailing list pgadmin-hackers
From | Dave Page |
---|---|
Subject | Re: pgAdmin IV API test cases patch |
Date | |
Msg-id | CA+OCxow+V_RU2y1q07R07UzZOmxLh+3WouSpwMXkYiz4v_V=qw@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: pgAdmin IV API test cases patch (Priyanka Shendge <priyanka.shendge@enterprisedb.com>) |
Responses |
Re: pgAdmin IV API test cases patch
|
List | pgadmin-hackers |
Hi, That's better. I tweaked a few things and fixed a bug related to recent changes to the schema version config. Patch attached. However, there are still issues: 1) The testsuite doesn't run to completion. See the attached stdout.txt and logger.txt files. 2) stdout should only display the test summary - what tests are currently running (and pass/fail), and a summary at the end - even if there's a crash like I saw. 3) The output log file should contain the full output, including what's sent to stdout. 4) The output advises the user to check ".../pgadmin4/web/regression". This should be in the summary at the end, and should be corrected to show the correct (full) path. Thanks. On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Priyanka Shendge <priyanka.shendge@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Hi Dave, > > As per discussion over mail i have created separate config files for > credentials and test data. > > PFA patch for same. Kindly, review and let me know for modifications. > > On 27 June 2016 at 15:10, Priyanka Shendge > <priyanka.shendge@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 27 June 2016 at 13:24, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Priyanka Shendge >>> <priyanka.shendge@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > On 24 June 2016 at 16:17, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hi >>> >> >>> >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Priyanka Shendge >>> >> <priyanka.shendge@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On 15 June 2016 at 15:05, Priyanka Shendge >>> >> > <priyanka.shendge@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Thanks a lot Dave. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> On 15 June 2016 at 14:09, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> Hi >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Priyanka Shendge >>> >> >>> <priyanka.shendge@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> > Hi Dave, >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > PFA updated patch. I have made changes suggested by you. >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > Kindly, review and let me know for more changes. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> OK, I got a bit further this time, but not there yet. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> 1) The patch overwrote my test_config.json file. That should never >>> >> >>> happen (that file shouldn't be in the source tree). >>> >> >>> test_config.json.in should be the file that's included in the >>> >> >>> patch. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> OK. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> 2) The updated test_config.json file is huge. >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > Current configuration file web/regression/test_config.json contains >>> >> > test >>> >> > data(credentials) for each tree node; >>> >> > which is used while adding and updating the respective node. >>> >> >>> >> Why would we need that? >>> > >>> > >>> > Each node file (e.g. test_db_add.py and test_db_put.py) uses respective >>> > credentials test data from >>> > test_config.json while execution. >>> >>> That doesn't answer my question - why do we need separate credentials >>> for each node? >> >> >> Sorry for typo, its test data not credentials. >> >>> >>> >>> >> We should have just one set of credentials for >>> >> everything. >>> > >>> > >>> > Let me know if my understanding is clear: >>> > >>> > Should i keep basic credentials of each node (database, schema) into >>> > test_config.json >>> > instead taking care of each field? >>> >>> You should have one set of credentials that's used for the entire test >>> run. >> >> >> Sure. I'll separate the credentials and test data into 2 different files. >> So, a normal user can run the tests into one go after some minor >> credentials changes. >> And an advanced user can have an option to change the test data if he >> wants. >>> >>> >>> >> >>> I should only need to >>> >> >>> define one or more connections, then be able to run the tests. If >>> >> >>> you >>> >> >>> need to keep configuration info for "advanced users", let's put it >>> >> >>> in >>> >> >>> a different file to avoid confusing/scaring everyone else. Maybe >>> >> >>> split >>> >> >>> it into config.json for the stuff the user needs to edit >>> >> >>> (config.json.in would go in git), and test_config.json for the >>> >> >>> test >>> >> >>> configuration. >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > Should i keep login and server credentials into >>> >> > web/regression/test_config.json file and >>> >> > put respective node details into config.json file of respective >>> >> > node's >>> >> > tests >>> >> > directory? >>> >> >>> >> Not if you expect users to need to edit them - and if not, why are the >>> >> values not just hard-coded? >>> >> >>> >> > e.g. for database node: >>> >> > I'll create config.json file into .../databases/tests/ directory >>> >> > put database add and update credentials into config.json >>> >> >>> >> The key here is to make it simple for users. >>> >> >>> >> - To run the default tests, they should be able to copy/edit a simple >>> >> file, and just add database server details for the server to run >>> >> against. >>> >> >>> >> - If we have configurable tests (because making them configurable adds >>> >> genuine value), then we can use an "advanced" config file to allow the >>> >> user to adjust settings as they want. >>> >> >>> >> In the simple case, the user should be able to run the tests >>> >> successfully within a minute or two from starting. >>> >> >>> >> In designing the layout for files etc, remember the following: >>> >> >>> >> - Users should never edit a file that is in our source control. That's >>> >> why we have .in files that we expect them to copy. >>> >> >>> >> - Unless they're an advanced user, they shouldn't need to copy the >>> >> config file for advanced options. That means that the tests should >>> >> have defaults that match what is in the template advanced config file >>> >> (or, the tests could read advanced.json.in if advanced.json doesn't >>> >> exist, though that does seem a little icky). Of course, those are >>> >> example filenames, not necessarily what you may choose. >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> Dave Page >>> >> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >>> >> Twitter: @pgsnake >>> >> >>> >> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>> >> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Best, >>> > Priyanka >>> > >>> > EnterpriseDB Corporation >>> > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dave Page >>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >>> Twitter: @pgsnake >>> >>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) >>> To make changes to your subscription: >>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best, >> Priyanka >> >> EnterpriseDB Corporation >> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company > > > > > -- > Best, > Priyanka > > EnterpriseDB Corporation > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Attachment
pgadmin-hackers by date: