-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 208
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
ci: spin-up ephemeral ESS clusters to run some system tests #2551
Open
v1v
wants to merge
9
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
feature/system-tests
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
at th emoment 9.1.0-SNAPSHOT
v1v
commented
Feb 17, 2025
v1v
commented
Feb 17, 2025
v1v
commented
Feb 17, 2025
v1v
commented
Feb 17, 2025
v1v
commented
Feb 17, 2025
probably we can use the oblt-cli binary in a script instead of using GH actions
chore run after
v1v
commented
Feb 17, 2025
# NOTE: you can now use the cluster credentials to run your tests | ||
# please see https://github.com/elastic/oblt-actions/tree/v1/oblt-cli/cluster-credentials#exported-environment-variables | ||
# for the environment variables that are set by this action | ||
- run: echo "TBC" |
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.
This is the step to honour the created ephemeral ESS projects
@stevejgordon, what are your thoughts?
v1v
commented
Feb 17, 2025
v1v
commented
Feb 26, 2025
permissions: >- | ||
{ | ||
"contents": "write", | ||
"pull_requests": "read" |
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.
Suggested change
"pull_requests": "read" | |
"pull_requests": "read", | |
"checks": "read" |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Using the production environment for this makes sense to ensure we are testing against released APM features.
In the subsequent tests, we'd need to access the APM endpoint and ApiKey to push APM data from the test applications. In the test projects, we'd need access to an API key with permissions to query Elasticsearch observability data streams to validate the received data.
As a stretch feature, although not critical from day one, it would be helpful to have programmatic access to query APM server logs from the project to log any errors that might occur during intake. This is one advantage to the in-memory mocked APM server we have today.
Summary steps:
Tasks