-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 107
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
feat(ci): add fully_synced_rpc_test
test to CI
#4223
Conversation
I changed the base branch to PR #4177 to pick up the latest changes. |
@teor2345 I might be changing it back to |
No worries - we just need to pick up the latest env var change. Feel free to rebase the branch, and change the GitHub base back. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just a quick review to help with some of the Rust test details.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This branch needs to be rebased on the latest #4177 changes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It seems like the scope of this PR has grown a lot, so it might take a long time to get it merged.
In the test meeting, we agreed to:
- start by putting the fully synced RPC test in CI
- then put the lightwalletd full sync in CI, to generate the lightwalletd state for other tests
- then get other devs in the team to work on CI PRs for the other integration tests
This PR seems to try to cover all the tests - can we split it up, and start with the fully synced RPC test?
lightwalletd_full_sync
and lightwalletd_update_sync
CI tests
lightwalletd_full_sync
and lightwalletd_update_sync
CI testslightwalletd_*_sync
CI tests
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, that looks a bit more manageable.
I think I got the order slightly wrong, I forgot we wanted to do Janito's tests next week.
So I think we might want to do a PR series like this:
- the fully synced RPC test in CI
- the send transaction test in CI
- the lightwalletd full sync in CI, to generate the lightwalletd state for other tests
- get other devs in the team to work on CI PRs for the other integration tests
What do you think? Have I missed anything else?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I didn't do a review, but there are some syntax errors in the lints.
This reverts commit a8fbc5f. Cache expiration is a lesser evil than not using caching at all and then failing with a 401
Co-authored-by: teor <teor@riseup.net>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
The fully-synced-rpc test is not connected to the state:
We should not be seeing a genesis download in the logs. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We need to connect the fully-synced-rpc test to the cached Zebra state
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is ready to go, and independent of the cached tip state rebuild
Motivation
We want to add all completed
lightwalletd
integration tests to CI, to confirm we're not introducing bugs to the RPC endpoints or any other implementation related tolightwalletd
Fixes #4169
Fixes: #4305
Depends-On: #4252,#4266,#4271
Designs
test.yml
andtest-full-sync.yml
Solution
test-lightwalletd.yml
fully_synced_rpc_test
test to CIfully_synced_rpc_test
toentrypoint.sh
for easier executionReview
@teor2345 or @dconnolly can review this
Reviewer Checklist
Follow Up Work
Simplify this job with the refactor being done for reusable workflows