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

test!: removes e2e benchmark tests for blocks >8MB, uses main branch for others #3866

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

staheri14
Copy link
Contributor

Closes #3865

@staheri14 staheri14 self-assigned this Sep 11, 2024
@staheri14
Copy link
Contributor Author

The benchmark tests TwoNodeBigBlock8MBLatency and TwoNodeBigBlock8MB, using the latest main branch for the validators and txsim (i.e., using the changes in this PR), passed with no issues.

@staheri14 staheri14 marked this pull request as ready for review September 12, 2024 23:50
@staheri14 staheri14 requested a review from a team as a code owner September 12, 2024 23:50
@staheri14 staheri14 requested review from rootulp and ninabarbakadze and removed request for a team September 12, 2024 23:50
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 12, 2024

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the end-to-end benchmark tests by removing several test cases focused on larger block sizes (32MB and 64MB) and refactoring the code to utilize a dynamic function for retrieving application versions. This streamlines the testing process by focusing on 8MB block sizes and enhancing code maintainability.

Changes

File Change Summary
test/e2e/benchmark/main.go Removed test cases: "TwoNodeBigBlock32MB", "TwoNodeBigBlock64MB", "LargeNetworkBigBlock32MB", "LargeNetworkBigBlock64MB" from the tests slice.
test/e2e/benchmark/throughput.go Refactored bigBlockManifest into getBigBlockManifest() function for dynamic version retrieval, modified benchmark functions to use this new function, and removed functions for 32MB and 64MB benchmarks.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
The e2e benchmark tests will be updated to use the latest from the main branch. (#[3865])
Other benchmark tests for block sizes of 32 and 64MB will also be removed until a concrete plan is developed for those. (#[3865])

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

chore, testing, WS: Big Blonks 🔭


Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 95b7ebd and 102cc65.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • test/e2e/benchmark/throughput.go (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • test/e2e/benchmark/throughput.go

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

‼️ IMPORTANT
Auto-reply has been disabled for this repository in the CodeRabbit settings. The CodeRabbit bot will not respond to your replies unless it is explicitly tagged.

  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    -- @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    -- @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    -- @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    -- @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    -- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    -- @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@staheri14 staheri14 changed the title test!: removes e2e benchmarks for blocks >8MB, uses main branch for others test!: removes e2e benchmark tests for blocks >8MB, uses main branch for others Sep 13, 2024
rootulp
rootulp previously approved these changes Sep 13, 2024
ninabarbakadze
ninabarbakadze previously approved these changes Sep 18, 2024
@celestia-bot celestia-bot requested a review from a team September 19, 2024 23:27
Comment on lines 27 to 37
MemoryRequest: resource.MustParse("12Gi"),
MemoryLimit: resource.MustParse("12Gi"),
CPU: resource.MustParse("8"),
Volume: resource.MustParse("20Gi"),
},
TxClientsResource: testnet.Resources{
MemoryRequest: resource.MustParse("1Gi"),
MemoryLimit: resource.MustParse("3Gi"),
CPU: resource.MustParse("2"),
Volume: resource.MustParse("1Gi"),
},
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

once you fix lint I'll reapprove @staheri14

manifest.Validators = 50
manifest.TxClients = 50
manifest.BlobSequences = 2
return runBenchmarkTest(logger, "LargeNetworkBigBlock8MB", manifest)
}

func LargeNetworkBigBlock32MB(logger *log.Logger) error {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think this was part of the exported Go API https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/celestiaorg/celestia-app/v2@v2.2.0/test/e2e/benchmark so we can probably drop the ! from the PR title

Copy link
Member

@evan-forbes evan-forbes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i'm good with removing these

in theory, we'll get a pulumi backend for knuu, which would allow us to use these, but we can add them back then

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Refocusing big block tests on 8MB block sizes and simplifying maintenance
4 participants