geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Warner" <jaw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Continuous TCK Testing
Date Mon, 06 Oct 2008 15:24:23 GMT
Just got around to reading this.  Thanks for the brain dump, Jason.  No
questions as of yet, but I'm sure I'll need a few more reads before I
understand it all.

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Jason Dillon <jason.dillon@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Oct 1, 2008, at 11:20 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
>
>  Is the GBuild stuff in svn the same as the anthill-based code or is that
>> something different?  GBuild seems to have scripts for running tck and that
>> leads me to think they're the same thing, but I see no mention of anthill in
>> the code.
>>
>
> The Anthill stuff is completely different than the GBuild stuff.  I started
> out trying to get the TCK automated using GBuild, but decided that the
> system lacked too many features to perform as I desired, and went ahead with
> Anthill as it did pretty much everything, though had some stability
> problems.
>
> One of the main reasons why I choose Anthill (AHP, Anthill Pro that is) was
> its build agent and code repository systems.  This allowed me to ensure that
> each build used exactly the desired artifacts.  Another was the configurable
> workflow, which allowed me to create a custom chain of events to handle
> running builds on remote agents and control what data gets set to them, what
> it will collect and what logic to execute once all distributed work has been
> completed for a particular build.  And the kicker which help facilitate
> bringing it all together was its concept of a build life.
>
> At the time I could find *no other* build tool which could meet all of
> these needs, and so I went with AHP instead of spending months
> building/testing features in GBuild.
>
> While AHP supports configuring a lot of stuff via its web-interface, I
> found that it was very cumbersome, so I opted to write some glue, which was
> stored in svn here:
>
>
> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/geronimo/sandbox/build-support/?pathrev=632245
>
> Its been a while, so I have to refresh my memory on how this stuff actually
> worked.  First let me explain about the code repository (what it calls
> codestation) and why it was critical to the TCK testing IMO.  When we use
> Maven normally, it pulls data from a set of external repositories, picks up
> more repositories from the stuff it downloads and quickly we loose control
> where stuff comes from.  After it pulls down all that stuff, it churns
> though a build and spits out the stuff we care about, normally stuffing them
> (via mvn install) into the local repository.
>
> AHP supports by default tasks to publish artifacts (really just a set of
> files controlled by an Ant-like include/exclude path) from a build agent
> into Codestation, as well as tasks to resolve artifacts (ie. download them
> from Codestation to the local working directory on the build agents system).
>  Each top-level build in AHP gets assigned a new (empty) build life.
>  Artifacts are always published to/resolved from a build life, either that
> of the current build, or of a dependency build.
>
> So what I did was I setup builds for Geronimo Server (the normal
> server/trunk stuff), which did the normal mvn install thingy, but I always
> gave it a custom -Dmaven.local.repository which resolved to something inside
> the working directory for the running build.  The build was still online, so
> it pulled down a bunch of stuff into an empty local repository (so it was a
> clean build wrt the repository, as well as the source code, which was always
> fetched for each new build).  Once the build had finished, I used the
> artifact publisher task to push *all* of the stuff in the local repository
> into Codestation, labled as something like "Maven repository artifacts" for
> the current build life.
>
> Then I setup another build for Apache Geronimo CTS Server (the
> porting/branches/* stuff).  This build was dependent upon the "Maven
> repository artifacts" of the Geronimo Server build, and I configured those
> artifacts to get installed on the build agents system in the same directory
> that I configured the CTS Server build to use for its local maven
> repository.  So again the repo started out empty, then got populated with
> all of the outputs from the normal G build, and then the cts-server build
> was started.  The build of the components and assemblies is normally fairly
> quick and aside from some stuff in the private tck repo won't download muck
> more stuff, because it already had most of its dependencies installed via
> the Codestation dependency resolution.   Once the build finished, I
> published to cts-server assembly artifacts back to Codestation under like
> "CTS Server Assemblies" or something.
>
> Up until this point its normal builds, but now we have built the G server,
> then built the CTS server (using the *exact* artifacts from the G server
> build, even though each might have happened on a different build agent).
>  And now we need to go and run a bunch of tests, using the *exact* CTS
> server assemblies, produce some output, collect it, and once all of the
> tests are done render some nice reports, etc.
>
> AHP supports setting up builds which contain "parallel" tasks, each of
> those tasks is then performed by a build agent, they have fancy build agent
> selection stuff, but for my needs I had basically 2 groups, one group for
> running the server builds, and then another for running the tests.  I only
> set aside like 2 agents for builds and the rest for tests.  Oh, I forgot to
> mention that I had 2 16x 16g AMD beasts all running CentOS 5, each with
> about 10-12 Xen virtual machines running internally to run build agents.
>  Each system also had a RAID-0 array setup over 4 disks to help reduce disk
> io wait, which was as I found out the limiting factor when trying to run a
> ton of builds that all checkout and download artifacts and such.
>
> I helped the AHP team add a new feature which was an parallel iterator
> task, so you define *one* task that internally fires off n parallel tasks,
> which would set the iteration number, and leave it up to the build logic to
> pick what to do based on that index.  The alternative was a unwieldy set of
> like 200 tasks in their UI which simply didn't work at all.  You might have
> notice an "iterations.xml" file in the tck-testsuite directory, this was was
> was used to take an iteration number and turn it into what tests we actually
> run.  The <iteration> bits are order sensitive in that file.
>
> Soooo, after we have a CTS Server for a particular G Server build, we can
> no go an do "runtests" for a specific set of tests (defined by an
> iteration)... this differed from the other builds above a little, but still
> pulled down artifacts, the CTS Server assemblies (only the assemblies and
> the required bits to run the geronimo-maven-plugin, which was used to
> geronimo:install, as well as used by the tck itself to fire up the server
> and so on).  The key thing here, with regards to the maven configuration
> (besides using that custom Codestation populated repository) was that the
> builds were run *offline*.
>
> After runtests completed, the results are then soaked up (the stuff that
> javatest pukes out with icky details, as well as the full log files and
> other stuff I can recall) and then pushed back into Codestation.
>
> Once all of the iterations were finished, another task fires off which
> generates a report.  It does this by downloading from Codestation all of the
> runtests outputs (each was zipped I think), unzips them one by one, run some
> custom goo I wrote (based some of the concepts from original stuff from the
> GBuild-based TCK automation), and generates a nice Javadoc-like report that
> includes all of the gory details.
>
> I can't remember how long I spent working on this... too long (not the
> reports I mean, the whole system).  But in the end I recall something like
> running an entire TCK testsuite for a single server configuration (like
> jetty) in about 4-6 hours... I sent mail to the list with the results, so if
> you are curious what the real number is, instead of my guess, you can look
> for it there.  But anyway it was damn quick running on just those 2
> machines.  And I *knew* exactly that each of the distributed tests was
> actually testing a known build that I could trace back to its artifacts and
> then back to its SVN revision, without worrying about mvn downloading
> something new when midnight rolled over or that a new G server or CTS server
> build that might be in progress hasn't compromised the testing by polluting
> the local repository.
>
>  * * *
>
> So, about the sandbox/build-support stuff...
>
> First there is the 'harness' project, which is rather small, but contains
> the basic stuff, like a version of ant and maven which all of these builds
> would use, some other internal glue, a  fix for an evil Maven problem
> causing erroneous build failures due to some internal thread state
> corruption or gremlins, not sure which.  I kinda used this project to help
> manage the software needed by normal builds, which is why Ant and Maven were
> in there... ie. so I didn't have to go install it on each agent each time it
> changed, just let the AHP system deal with it for me.
>
> This was setup as a normal AHP project, built using its internal Ant
> builder (though having that builder configured still to use the local
> version it pulled from SVN to ensure it always works.
>
> Each other build was setup to depend on the output artifacts from the build
> harness build, using the latest in a range, like say using "3.*" for the
> latest 3.x build (which looks like that was 3.7).  This let me work on new
> stuff w/o breaking the current builds as I hacked things up.
>
> So, in addition to all of the stuff I mentioned above wrt the G and CTS
> builds, each also had this step which resolved the build harness artifacts
> to that working directory, and the Maven builds were always run via the
> version of Maven included from the harness.  But, AHP didn't actually run
> that version of Maven directly, it used its internal Ant task to execute the
> version of Ant from the harness *and* use the harness.xml buildfile.
>
> The harness.xml stuff is some more goo which I wrote to help mange AHP
> configurations.  With AHP (at that time, not sure if it has changed) you had
> to do most everything via the web UI, which sucked, and it was hard to
> refactor sets of projects and so on.  So I came up with a standard set of
> tasks to execute for a project, then put all of the custom muck I needed
> into what I called a _library_ and then had the AHP via harness.xml invoke
> it with some configuration about what project it was and other build
> details.
>
> The actual harness.xml is not very big, it simply makes sure that */bin/*
> is executable (codestation couldn't preserve execute bits), uses the
> Codestation command-line client (invoking the javaclass directly though) to
> ask the repository to resolve artifacts from the "Build Library" to the
> local repository.  I had this artifact resolution separate from the normal
> dependency (or harness) artifact resolution so that it was easier for me to
> fix problems with the library while a huge set of TCK iterations were still
> queued up to run.  Basically, if I noticed a problem due to a code or
> configuration issue in an early build, I could fix it, and use the existing
> builds to verify the fix, instead of wasting an hour (sometimes more
> depending on networking problems accessing remote repos while building the
> servers) to rebuild and start over.
>
> This brings us to the 'libraries' project.  In general the idea of a
> _library_ was just a named/versioned collection of files, where you could be
> used by a project.  The main (er only) library defined in this SVN is
> system/.  This is the groovy glue which made everything work.  This is where
> the entry-point class is located (the guy who gets invoked via harness.xml
> via:
>
>    <target name="harness" depends="init">
>        <groovy>
>            <classpath>
>                <pathelement location="${library.basedir}/groovy"/>
>            </classpath>
>
>            gbuild.system.BuildHarness.bootstrap(this)
>        </groovy>
>    </target>
>
> I won't go into too much detail on this stuff now, take a look at it and
> ask questions.  But, basically there is stuff in gbuild.system.* which is
> harness support muck, and stuff in gbuild.config.* which contains
> configuration.  I was kinda mid-refactoring of some things, starting to add
> new features, not sure where I left off actually. But the key bits are in
> gbuild.config.project.*  This contains a package for each project, with the
> package name being the same as the AHP project (with " " -> "_"). And then
> in each of those package is at least a Controller.groovy class (or other
> classes if special muck was needed, like for the report generation in
> Geronimo_CTS, etc).
>
> The controller defines a set of actions, implemented as Groovy closures
> bound to properties of the Controller class.  One of the properties passed
> in from the AHP configuration (configured via the Web UI, passed to the
> harness.xml build, and then on to the Groovy harness) was the name of the
> _action_ to execute.  Most of that stuff should be fairly straightforward.
>
> So after a build is started (maybe from a Web UI click, or SVN change
> detection, or a TCK runtests iteration) the following happens (in simplified
> terms):
>
>  * Agent starts build
>  * Agent cleans its working directory
>  * Agent downloads the build harness
>  * Agent downloads any dependencies
>  * Agent invoke Ant on harness.xml passing in some details
>  * Harness.xml downloads the system/1 library
>  * Harness.xml runs gbuild.system.BuildHarness
>  * BuildHarness tries to construct a Controller instance for the project
>  * BuildHarness tries to find Controller action to execute
>  * BuildHarness executes the Controller action
>  * Agent publishes output artifacts
>  * Agent completes build
>
> A few extra notes on libraries, the JavaEE TCK requires a bunch of stuff we
> get from Sun to execute.  This stuff isn't small, but is for the most part
> read-only.  So I setup a location on each build agent where these files were
> installed to.  I created AHP projects to manage them and treated them like a
> special "library" one which tried really hard not to go fetch its content
> unless the local content was out of date.  This helped speed up the entire
> build process... cause that delete/download of all that muck really slows
> down 20 agents running in parallel on 2 big machines with stripped array.
>  For legal reasons this stuff was not kept in svn.apache.org's main
> repository, and for logistical reasons wasn't kept in the private tck repo
> on svn.apache.org either.  Because there were so many files, and be case
> the httpd configuration on svn.apache.org kicks out requests that it
> thinks are *bunk* to help save the resources for the community, I had setup
> a private ssl secured private svn repository on the old gbuild.orgmachines to put in
the full muck required, then setup some goo in the
> harness to resolve them.  This goo is all in gbuild.system.library.*  See
> the gbuild.config.projects.Geronimo_CTS.Controller for more of how it was
> actually used.
>
>  * * *
>
> Okay, that is about all the brain-dump for TCK muck I have in me for
> tonight.  Reply with questions if you have any.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --jason
>
>
>


-- 
~Jason Warner

Mime
View raw message