[infinispan-dev] HotRod client TCK

Tue Apr 18 03:01:46 EDT 2017

On 04/14/2017 03:50 PM, Sebastian Laskawiec wrote:
> I think that's a very good point Radim. But on the other hand I think 
> we may treat it as an implementation detail. The TCK must run without 
> Infinispan server.

So the tests in TCK won't start/configure the server, that will be 
managed elsewhere?

R.

>
> I also believe it would be beneficial to define as least 2-3 levels of 
> support, e.g. basic (only basic operations, no consistent hash 
> support), advanced (all features). This way we could validate some 
> more exotic clients such as Go (https://github.com/ugol/infinispan-go).
>
> And in my opinion, a final version of this document go to infinispan 
> design repository: https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan-designs
>
> Apart from that, that's huge effort and really great job!
>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:05 PM Radim Vansa <rvansa at redhat.com 
> <mailto:rvansa at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>     Since these tests use real server(s), many of them test not only the
>     client behaviour (generating correct commands according to the
>     protocol), but server, too. While this is practical (we need to test
>     server somehow, too), there's nothing all the tests across languages
>     will have physically in common and all comparison is prone to
>     human error.
>
>     If we want to test various implementations of the client, maybe it
>     would
>     make sense to give the clients a fake server that will have just a
>     scenario of expected commands to receive and pre-defined responses. We
>     could use audit log to generate such scenario based on the actual Java
>     tests.
>
>     But then we'd have to test the actual behaviour on server, and
>     we'd need
>     a way to issue the commands.
>
>     Just my 2c
>
>     Radim
>
>     On 04/11/2017 02:33 PM, Martin Gencur wrote:
>     > Hello all,
>     > we have been working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-7120.
>     >
>     > Anna has finished the first step from the JIRA - collecting
>     information
>     > about tests in the Java HotRod client test suite (including server
>     > integration tests) and it is now prepared for wider review.
>     >
>     > She created a spreadsheet [1]. The spread sheet includes for
>     each Java
>     > test its name, the suggested target package in the TCK, whether to
>     > include it in the TCK or not, and some other notes. The suggested
>     > package also poses grouping for the tests (e.g. tck.query, tck.near,
>     > tck.xsite, ...)
>     >
>     > Let me add that right now the goal is not to create a true TCK
>     [2]. The
>     > goal is to make sure that all implementations of the HotRod protocol
>     > have sufficient test coverage and possibly the same server side
>     of the
>     > client-server test (including the server version and configuration).
>     >
>     > What are the next step?
>     >
>     > * Please review the list (at least a quick look) and see if some
>     of the
>     > tests which are NOT suggested for the TCK should be added or
>     vice versa.
>     > * I suppose the next step would then be to check other
>     implementations
>     > (C#, C++, NodeJS, ..) and identify tests which are missing there
>     (there
>     > will surely be some).
>     > * Gradually implement the missing tests in the other implementations
>     >     Note: Here we should ensure that the server is configured in
>     the same
>     > way for all implementations. One way to achieve this (thanks
>     Anna for
>     > suggestion!) is to have a shell/batch scripts for CLI which would be
>     > executed before the tests. This can probably be done for all
>     impls. and
>     > both UNIX/WINDOWS. I also realize that my PR for ISPN [3] becomes
>     > useless because it uses Creaper (Java) and we need a
>     language-neutral
>     > solution for configuring the server.
>     >
>     > Some other notes:
>     > * there are some duplicated tests in hotrod-client and server
>     > integration test suites, in this case it probably makes sense to
>     only
>     > include in the TCK the server integration test
>     > * tests from the hotrod-client module which are supposed to be
>     part of
>     > the TCK should be copied to the server integration test suite
>     one day
>     > (possibly later)
>     >
>     > Please let us know what you think.
>     >
>     > Thanks,
>     > Martin
>     >
>     >
>     > [1]
>     >
>     https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bZBBi5m4oLL4lBTZhdRbIC_EA0giQNDZWzFNPWrF5G4/edit#gid=0
>     > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_Compatibility_Kit
>     > [3] https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/5012
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > infinispan-dev mailing list
>     > infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
>     <mailto:infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>     > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>
>
>     --
>     Radim Vansa <rvansa at redhat.com <mailto:rvansa at redhat.com>>
>     JBoss Performance Team
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     infinispan-dev mailing list
>     infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>     https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>
> -- 
>
> SEBASTIANŁASKAWIEC
>
> INFINISPAN DEVELOPER
>
> Red HatEMEA <https://www.redhat.com/>
>
> <https://red.ht/sig>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> infinispan-dev mailing list
> infinispan-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

-- 
Radim Vansa <rvansa at redhat.com>
JBoss Performance Team