-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 157
ROX-29641: Fix k6 tests #15610
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
ROX-29641: Fix k6 tests #15610
Conversation
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.
Hey @mtodor - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!
Here's what I looked at during the review
- 🟢 General issues: all looks good
- 🟢 Security: all looks good
- 🟢 Testing: all looks good
- 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
- 🟢 Documentation: all looks good
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
Images are ready for the commit at 289a5d8. To use with deploy scripts, first |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #15610 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 48.80% 48.80% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 2590 2590
Lines 190471 190470 -1
==========================================
- Hits 92962 92958 -4
- Misses 90211 90213 +2
- Partials 7298 7299 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
1cc31ea
to
99d0c82
Compare
Performance test resultsSummary
Sources
|
99d0c82
to
c1ff529
Compare
/test gke-upgrade-tests |
27982ef
to
c1eded0
Compare
c1eded0
to
a79b350
Compare
a79b350
to
289a5d8
Compare
/retest |
/test gke-qa-e2e-tests |
@mtodor: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
Description
Initial investigation showed that sensors were properly scheduled and working, but after some additional testing, it turned out that this is not true. It appears that the sensors are not running, which is why the workload is not being created.
Further findings
It looks like the specific node becomes unstable, and sensors scheduled on that node never reach the
running
state. It's not clear what causes node instability. After additional testing, the most stable solution option is to deploy central without scanner V4 and set sensor memory request higher.User-facing documentation
Testing and quality
Automated testing
How I validated my change