Skip to content

tests: for backup schedules#700

Merged
boddumanohar merged 2 commits intodevfrom
add-backup-schedule-tests
Mar 27, 2026
Merged

tests: for backup schedules#700
boddumanohar merged 2 commits intodevfrom
add-backup-schedule-tests

Conversation

@boddumanohar
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

create a backup schedule and verify its backup (PVC snapshot) get created on schedule.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@mxsrc mxsrc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Honestly I'm not sure this is a good idea. This will add a 1-2 minutes to the test execution time for something that we haven't modified in a while. Thoughts on alternatives are to add the test, but not run it by default, but manually instead. Or we could test the schedule creation and confirm the entries are created in the database, even though that will not actually test execution.

What do you think? I'm all for adding more tests, that is definitely the right direction, but at the same time we need to keep the change-test-loop short. We can also start to see whether test execution can be parallelized, the different aspects should be largely independent of each other, that would also alleviate this issue.

@boddumanohar
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Thanks for raising this, yeah, I've also have started to observe the test duration has increased. So I've removed this file from testpaths so that the test can be run manually if needed in future. Because Back schedule are an important functionality that we provide. It's better to have some form of automatic testing. It doesn't need to be tested for each PR. So removed this file from testpaths

@boddumanohar boddumanohar merged commit d9aaeaa into dev Mar 27, 2026
7 of 8 checks passed
@boddumanohar boddumanohar deleted the add-backup-schedule-tests branch March 27, 2026 02:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants