Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="===============5313137414260403032=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Review Request 19195: Automation of CCP Objects Verification after
 external
 changes made to the orignial setup
From: "Chandan Purushothama" <Chandan.Purushothama@citrix.com>
To: "Girish Shilamkar" <girish@clogeny.com>,
 "Santhosh Edukulla" <santhosh.edukulla@citrix.com>,
 "sanjeev n" <sanjeev.neelarapu@citrix.com>,
 "SrikanteswaraRao Talluri" <srikanteswararao.talluri@citrix.com>
Cc: "Chandan Purushothama" <Chandan.Purushothama@citrix.com>,
 "cloudstack" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 18:49:23 -0000
Message-ID: <20140313184923.11093.21249@reviews.apache.org>
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Sender: "Chandan Purushothama" <noreply@reviews.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Chandan Purushothama" <Chandan.Purushothama@citrix.com>

--===============5313137414260403032==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/19195/
-----------------------------------------------------------

Review request for cloudstack, Girish Shilamkar, sanjeev n, Santhosh Edukulla, and SrikanteswaraRao Talluri.


Repository: cloudstack-git


Description
-------

Purpose of this code:

Generate CCP Objects (VMs, Volumes, Snapshots, VPC, etc..) and CCP Use Cases (Networking, Data Content,etc) before an external action on the CCP Setup and verify the integrity of the CCP Objects and the Use Cases after the external action on the CCP Setup. This validates the intactness of the setup before and after an external action. The submitted patch covers only few major use cases. It proves that similar code can be added in future to address similar goals in verifying the integrity of CCP objects belonging to different components of the product.

The code format can be followed to verify validity of real time business use cases while any code changes (CCP,hypervisor,external devices code, etc…) happen over a period of time.

The following are the scenarios that the code format can be used for:
1.Upgrade Validity Verification
     a.	CCP Upgrade
     b.	Hypervisors Upgrade
     c.	External Devices Upgrade
     d.	System VM Template Changes.
2.Patch Validity Verification

Code can be used as one of the primary Components to validity Upgrades. It will facilitate the automation of Upgrade Test Verification completely. 

How to use the code:

*Kindly make the corresponding substitutions in the commands listed below.

Execute:
 nosetests --with-marvin --marvin-config=$CONFIG $BASEDIR/integration/component/ test_minimal_ug_check.py --load -a tags=preupgrade

After Upgrade or any Changes done to the Setup, Verify that the existing CCP objects are not affected due to the external changes.

Execute:
nosetests --with-marvin --marvin-config=$CONFIG $BASEDIR/integration/component/ test_minimal_ug_check.py --load -a tags=postupgrade


Diffs
-----

  test/integration/component/test_minimal_ug_check.py PRE-CREATION 
  tools/marvin/marvin/config/config.cfg 5849fe8 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/19195/diff/


Testing
-------

PreUpgrade Output:

Test case no : Enable VPN for Public IP Address on the VPC ... ok    <-- Will fix the description in the next patch

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 test in 1683.515s

OK

Post Upgrade Output:

Test case no : Remote a VPN User ... ok  <-- Will fix the description in the next patch

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 test in 1269.134s

OK


Thanks,

Chandan Purushothama


--===============5313137414260403032==--