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

added uperf to run from run_snafu --tool #138

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Apr 16, 2020
Merged

added uperf to run from run_snafu --tool #138

merged 8 commits into from
Apr 16, 2020

Conversation

amitsagtani97
Copy link
Member

@amitsagtani97 amitsagtani97 commented Feb 13, 2020

Depends-On: 283

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@jtaleric jtaleric added the ok to test Kick off our CI framework label Feb 13, 2020
@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper PASS 00:12:41
fs_drift_wrapper PASS 00:09:58
hammerdb FAIL 00:16:38
iperf PASS 00:06:09
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:07:31
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:12:03
sysbench PASS 00:05:20
uperf_wrapper FAIL 00:07:17
ycsb-wrapper PASS 00:14:18


class Trigger_uperf():
def __init__(self, args):
stdout = self._run_uperf(args.workload[0])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think all of this will need to move to a new function called emit_actions(), you can take a look at https://github.com/cloud-bulldozer/snafu/blob/master/run_snafu.py#L119 and that's why the comment below about yield documents and the index...

Copy link
Contributor

@aakarshg aakarshg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Posted comments also CI will keep failing until we update how we run the test in ripsaw as the snafu ci uses ripsaw !

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper PASS 00:13:04
fs_drift_wrapper PASS 00:10:39
hammerdb FAIL 00:16:42
iperf PASS 00:06:26
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:07:33
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:12:01
sysbench PASS 00:05:16
uperf_wrapper FAIL 00:08:14
ycsb-wrapper PASS 00:12:43

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper PASS 00:13:15
fs_drift_wrapper PASS 00:10:49
hammerdb FAIL 00:16:58
iperf PASS 00:06:22
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:08:02
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:12:27
sysbench PASS 00:05:24
uperf_wrapper FAIL 00:10:12
ycsb-wrapper PASS 00:16:28

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper PASS 00:13:18
fs_drift_wrapper PASS 00:10:27
hammerdb FAIL 00:16:59
iperf PASS 00:06:16
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:08:01
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:11:52
sysbench PASS 00:05:27
uperf_wrapper FAIL 00:10:17
ycsb-wrapper PASS 00:15:49

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

1 similar comment
@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper PASS 00:12:52
fs_drift_wrapper PASS 00:10:29
hammerdb FAIL 00:17:02
iperf PASS 00:06:45
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:07:33
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:13:33
sysbench PASS 00:05:46
uperf_wrapper FAIL 00:10:20
ycsb-wrapper PASS 00:20:52

Copy link
Member

@dry923 dry923 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

@aakarshg aakarshg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The documents in elasticsearch are missing user and client_ips field

@jtaleric
Copy link
Member

jtaleric commented Mar 26, 2020

The documents in elasticsearch are missing user and client_ips field

Looking at the code, I don't see how this can be?
Was the user passed?
Did UPerf run and somehow we didn't capture the clients?

@jtaleric jtaleric self-requested a review March 26, 2020 11:52
@amitsagtani97
Copy link
Member Author

@jtaleric The user was exported in the environment variable but it wasn't found when fetched by the uperf. We tried to pass the user and client_ips as argument

run_snafu --tool -user {{test_user | default("ripsaw") }} -client_ips $(hostname -I)

Here the user was sent correctly but the client_ip wasn't sent.
and the rest of the data was saved in the ElasticSearch. Also, the CI test passed because we fetch results on elastic by index and uuid only.

python3 ci/check_es.py -s marquez.perf.lab.eng.rdu2.redhat.com -p 9200 -u b0065619-ee93-527c-b1e1-f208e14c1f0b -i ripsaw-uperf-results

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper PASS 00:16:42
fs_drift_wrapper PASS 00:09:39
hammerdb FAIL 00:17:01
iperf PASS 00:07:12
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:07:27
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:11:12
sysbench PASS 00:04:56
uperf_wrapper PASS 00:25:44
ycsb_wrapper FAIL 00:17:41

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper PASS 00:16:08
fs_drift_wrapper FAIL 00:09:39
hammerdb PASS 00:11:18
iperf PASS 00:06:53
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:07:20
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:11:26
sysbench PASS 00:05:14
uperf_wrapper PASS 00:25:01
ycsb_wrapper PASS 00:12:56

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

aakarshg commented Apr 6, 2020

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper FAIL 00:02:20
fs_drift_wrapper FAIL 00:02:00
hammerdb FAIL 00:03:11
iperf FAIL 00:00:50
pgbench-wrapper FAIL 00:02:13
smallfile_wrapper FAIL 00:02:26
sysbench FAIL 00:00:59
uperf_wrapper FAIL 00:02:06
ycsb_wrapper FAIL 00:08:54

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

aakarshg commented Apr 6, 2020

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper FAIL 00:31:49
fs_drift_wrapper FAIL 00:10:20
hammerdb PASS 00:11:18
iperf PASS 00:06:59
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:07:41
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:10:58
sysbench PASS 00:04:56
uperf_wrapper PASS 00:25:11
ycsb_wrapper PASS 00:13:34

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

aakarshg commented Apr 9, 2020

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper FAIL 00:09:33

@dry923
Copy link
Member

dry923 commented Apr 9, 2020

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper FAIL 00:07:03

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper FAIL 00:12:09
fs_drift_wrapper FAIL 00:07:48
hammerdb PASS 00:08:20
iperf PASS 00:04:54
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:04:25
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:07:21
sysbench PASS 00:03:21
uperf_wrapper FAIL 00:30:30
ycsb_wrapper PASS 00:09:18

@aakarshg
Copy link
Contributor

/rerun all

@rht-perf-ci
Copy link

Results for SNAFU CI Test

Test Result Runtime
fio_wrapper PASS 00:10:26
fs_drift_wrapper PASS 00:07:05
hammerdb PASS 00:07:48
iperf PASS 00:04:45
pgbench-wrapper PASS 00:04:31
smallfile_wrapper PASS 00:07:42
sysbench PASS 00:03:27
uperf_wrapper PASS 00:18:44
ycsb_wrapper PASS 00:10:56

Copy link
Contributor

@aakarshg aakarshg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Everything looks good now with the PR

@aakarshg aakarshg merged commit 4143f16 into cloud-bulldozer:master Apr 16, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ok to test Kick off our CI framework
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants