test(general): run gc action robustness tests #3927
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3927 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 75.86% 77.20% +1.33%
==========================================
Files 470 481 +11
Lines 37301 28803 -8498
==========================================
- Hits 28299 22237 -6062
+ Misses 7071 4664 -2407
+ Partials 1931 1902 -29 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
…kopia into run-gc-action-robustness-tests
| _, err := eng.ExecAction(ctx, engine.GCActionKey, nil) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) | ||
| } | ||
| th.RunN(ctx, t, numClients, runGCFcn) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it work? Is maintenance being triggered?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. Copied from the log:
STDERR: Running full maintenance... Looking for active contents... Looking for unreferenced contents... GC found 0 unused contents (0 B) GC found 0 unused contents that are too recent to delete (0 B) GC found 10022 in-use contents (42.2 MB) GC found 61 in-use system-contents (26.8 KB) Rewriting contents from short packs... Total bytes rewritten 873.7 KB Found safe time to drop indexes: 2024-06-21 11:08:20.307877 -0700 PDT Dropping contents deleted before 2024-06-21 11:08:20.307877 -0700 PDT Skipping blob deletion because not enough time has passed yet (59m59s left). Cleaned up 0 logs. Cleaning up old index blobs which have already been compacted... Finished full maintenance.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this action being executed by a client?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. The test creates a single client, which connects to repo (kopia repo connect server), followed by the maintenance action (kopia maintenance run --full)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm confused 😕. That does not seem to match the expected behavior.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see. Can you clarify the expected behavior? I read through the documentation, and was not able to find any reference to a client not being allowed to run maintenance. Is this the expectation you are referring to? Let me know if I am misinterpreted the comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here's the explanation from snapshotter.go
// RunGC runs garbage collection on the server repository directly since clients
// are not authorized to do this.
func (mcs *MultiClientSnapshotter) RunGC(ctx context.Context, opts map[string]string) error {
return mcs.server.RunGC(ctx, opts)
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the alternative to make it clear and explicit?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could replace the function and the call to RunN with
th.Engine().TestRepo.RunGC(ctx, nil)
This would run the maintenance command . However, it won't be counted in engine action stats.
Co-authored-by: Julio López <1953782+julio-lopez@users.noreply.github.com>
The robustness tests do not cover maintenance action at the moment. This PR adds the full maintenance action to the robustness tests.