Re: OpenStack Swift functional tests on RGW

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 03/28/2017 10:33 PM, Tone Zhang wrote:
Hi all,

I met the same issue when I ran OpenStack tempest API test with
radosgw in recent. It is great if we can update swift tests up to
date.

@Casey, are there special test cases in Ceph used to test Swift API?
Could you please share me more information?

Thanks a lot!

Br,
Tone

On 29 March 2017 at 02:18, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Casey Bodley wrote:
On 03/28/2017 09:51 AM, Rajath Shashidhara wrote:
Hi,

I am getting started with contributing to Ceph. I sent my first pull
request a couple of weeks ago - https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/13908
. In testing the feature, I realized that the ceph/swift repository is
outdated. I tweaked some relevant functional tests on the
openstack/swift repository to run on RadosGW.

I was thinking that may be I can port all the functional tests from
openstack/swift to work on RGW. This way we can test how well RGW
complies with the Swift REST API. I'd like to know if that would be a
useful contribution to ceph. Also, since ceph/stack has diverged from
openstack/swift (20 commits ahead and 4919 commits behind upstream -
openstack/swift as of today), what approach should I take to push these
tests ?

Thanks,

Rajath Shashidhara

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi Rajath,

Thanks for looking into this - I think it would be extremely valuable to bring
our swift tests up to date. Looking at our fork, it appears that most of our
changes fall into two categories: updating dependencies/bootstrapping, and
adding 'fails_on_rgw' tags to tests that we know won't pass.

I'm hoping that the latest openstack/swift repo has the correct dependencies,
so we may not need to carry all of those patches forward.

Rebasing the commits that add our tags sounds tedious, but should be pretty
straightforward. For new upstream tests that don't pass against rgw, maybe add
a separate tag like 'new_fails_on_rgw' so that we can go through and evaluate
each of those once you finish.
See also:

         https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/6111

sage
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Hi Tone - it doesn't look like our fork has added any new test cases, no.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux