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

chore: remove e2e_slurm_misconfigured series tests #10023

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 10, 2024

Conversation

rb-determined-ai
Copy link
Contributor

@rb-determined-ai rb-determined-ai commented Oct 4, 2024

The only test in this series was an e2e test that the log shipper ships
a certain log in a certain situation.

We have unit tests for that, so delete the e2e test.

Now, I actually failed this e2e test when I first landed the log
shipper, so it wasn't totally good-for-nothing. But effectively, all it
was testing these days was that we did in fact use the new log shipper
in slurm workloads.

Now that the EE code is merged into the OSS code, and we can just use
the same LogShipperWrappedEntrypoint() function in all three classes of
resource manager, I don't see any real justification for this test.

This is part of a larger effort to get rid of our znode tests, which
are notoriously unreliable.

Copy link

netlify bot commented Oct 4, 2024

Deploy Preview for determined-ui ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit c3b8921
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/determined-ui/deploys/6707f8b90cd3ba00089f5ac0
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-10023--determined-ui.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 4, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 54.65%. Comparing base (2594d90) to head (c3b8921).
Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #10023      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   54.62%   54.65%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1260     1260              
  Lines      157558   157556       -2     
  Branches     3632     3630       -2     
==========================================
+ Hits        86071    86108      +37     
+ Misses      71353    71314      -39     
  Partials      134      134              
Flag Coverage Δ
backend 45.48% <100.00%> (+0.06%) ⬆️
harness 72.74% <ø> (ø)
web 54.38% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
master/pkg/tasks/dispatcher_task.go 96.91% <100.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

Copy link
Contributor

@azhou-determined azhou-determined left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm, but i'm also not really sure why this test was written in the first place / how we deploy slurm, so not really helpful here

Copy link
Contributor

@dannysauer dannysauer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@stoksc stoksc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

The only test in this series was an e2e test that the log shipper ships
a certain log in a certain situation.

We have unit tests for that, so delete the e2e test.

Now, I actually failed this e2e test when I first landed the log
shipper, so it wasn't totally good-for-nothing.  But effectively, all it
was testing these days was that we did in fact use the new log shipper
in slurm workloads.

Now that the EE code is merged into the OSS code, and we can just use
the same LogShipperWrappedEntrypoint() function in all three classes of
resource manager, I don't see any real justification for this test.

This is part of a larger effort to get rid of our znode tests, which
are notoriously unreliable.
@rb-determined-ai rb-determined-ai merged commit 2356f91 into main Oct 10, 2024
86 of 98 checks passed
@rb-determined-ai rb-determined-ai deleted the rb/rm-znode-ch2 branch October 10, 2024 23:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants