-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.2k
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
[FTR] Clean navigateToApp #100144
[FTR] Clean navigateToApp #100144
Conversation
d994e5f
to
d2a221d
Compare
@@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ export function CommonPageProvider({ getService, getPageObjects }: FtrProviderCo | |||
return currentUrl; | |||
}); | |||
|
|||
await retry.try(async () => { | |||
await retry.tryForTime(defaultFindTimeout, async () => { |
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.
@LeeDr I think we should shorten timeout for url validation from 120 sec = try: Joi.number().default(120000)
to 10 sec =find: Joi.number().default(10000)
: the logic here is that we wait for url to stop changing.
My guess is that it shouldn't take too long for re-direction/url change, and if it is happening we better fail fast.
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.
Not sure how, but ciGroups ran 1-2 min faster vs my other PR with no navigation changes.
guess it is related
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.
When reducing any timeouts, we just have to be careful about running tests on Cloud. I think Kibana can appear to stall when an index snapshot is happening.
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.
Yes, this could be the case. Let's see how it goes, but the global navigation timeout remains the same.
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 mean, I don't expect it to fail on cloud and if it will, then we should check performance of cloud instances.
@elasticmachine merge upstream |
💛 Build succeeded, but was flaky
Test FailuresKibana Pipeline / general / task-queue-process-13 / X-Pack Endpoint Functional Tests.x-pack/test/security_solution_endpoint/apps/endpoint/policy_details·ts.endpoint When on the Endpoint Policy Details Page when on Ingest Policy Edit Package Policy page should preserve updates done from the Fleet formStandard Out
Stack Trace
Metrics [docs]Unknown metric groupsReferences to deprecated APIs
History
To update your PR or re-run it, just comment with: |
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.
LGTM - only code review
Co-authored-by: Kibana Machine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Kibana Machine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
Looks like this PR has backport PRs but they still haven't been merged. Please merge them ASAP to keep the branches relatively in sync. |
1 similar comment
Looks like this PR has backport PRs but they still haven't been merged. Please merge them ASAP to keep the branches relatively in sync. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
1 similar comment
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Co-authored-by: Kibana Machine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
11 similar comments
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Friendly reminder: Looks like this PR hasn’t been backported yet. |
Co-authored-by: Kibana Machine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com> # Conflicts: # test/functional/page_objects/common_page.ts
Summary
Removing navigation test code that it is not valid anymore:
status_page
has a/status
route and there is no reason to handle it differently. Since it was changed & migrated to new platform there is no any web component withstatusPageContainer
test subject in the repo.Not sure how, but ciGroups ran 1-2 min faster vs my other PR with no navigation changes.