Re: Contributing ARM tests results to KCIDB

["Nikolai Kondrashov" <Nikolai.Kondrashov@redhat.com>]

On 9/18/20 6:21 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote:
 > So in order to carry on my experiments, I've just tried to push a new dataset
 > with a few changes in my data-layout to mimic what I see other origins do; this
 > contained something like 38 builds across 4 different revisions (with brand new
 > revisions IDs), but I cannot see anything on the UI: I just keep seeing the old
 > push from yesterday.
 >
 > JSON seems valid and kcidb-submit does not report any error even using -l DEBUG.
 > (I pushed >30mins ago)
 >
 > Any idea ?

Yes, I think it's one of the problems you uncovered :)

The schema allows for fully-compliant RFC3339 timestamps, but the BigQuery
database on the backend doesn't understand some of them. In particular it
doesn't understand the date-only timestamps you send. E.g. "2020-09-13".
That's what I wanted to fix today, but ran out of time.

Additionally, the backend doesn't have a way to report a problem to the
submitter at the moment. We intend to fix that, but for now it's possible only
through us looking at the logs and sending a message to the submitter :)

To work around this you can pad your timestamps with dummy date and time
data.

E.g. instead of sending:

     2020-09-13

you can send:

     2020-09-13 00:00:00+00:00

Hopefully that's the only problem. It could be, since you managed to send data
before :)

Nick

On 9/18/20 6:21 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote:
 > Hi Nikolai,
 >
 > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 08:26:15PM +0300, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
 >> On 9/17/20 7:22 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote:
 >>> It works too ... :D
 >>>
 >>> https://staging.kernelci.org:3000/d/build/build?orgId=1&var-dataset=playground_kernelci04&var-id=arm:2020-07-07:d3d7689c2cc9503266cac3bc777bb4ddae2e5f2e
 >>
 >> Whoa, awesome!
 >>
 >> And you have already uncovered a few issues we need to fix, too!
 >> I will deal with them tomorrow.
 >>
 >>> ..quick question though....given that now I'll have to play quite a bit
 >>> with it and see how's better to present our data, if anythinjg missing etc etc,
 >>> is there any chance (or way) that if I submmit the same JSON report multiple
 >>> times with slight differences here and there (but with the same IDs clearly)
 >>> I'll get my DB updated in the bits I have changed: as an example I've just
 >>> resubmitted the same report with added discovery_time and descriptions, and got
 >>> NO errors, but I cannot see the changes in the UI (unless they have still to
 >>> propagate...)..or maybe I can obtain the same effect by dropping my dataset
 >>> before re-submitting ?
 >>
 >> Right now it's not supported (with various possible quirks if attempted).
 >> So, preferably, submit only one, complete and final instance of each object
 >> (with unique ID) for now.
 >>
 >> We have a plan to support merging missing properties across multiple reported
 >> objects with the same ID.
 >>
 >>              Object A        Object B    Dashboard/Notifications
 >>
 >> FieldX:     Foo             Foo         Foo
 >> FieldY:                     Bar         Bar
 >> FieldZ:     Baz                         Baz
 >> FieldU:     Red             Blue        Red/Blue
 >>
 >> Since we're using a distributed database we cannot really maintain order
 >> (without introducing artificial global lock), so the order of the reports
 >> doesn't matter. We can only guarantee that a present value would override
 >> missing value. It would be undefined which value would be picked among
 >> multiple different values.
 >>
 >> This would allow gradual reporting of each object, but no editing, sorry.
 >>
 >> However, once again, this is a plan with some research done, only.
 >> I plan to start implementing it within a few weeks.
 >>
 >
 > So in order to carry on my experiments, I've just tried to push a new dataset
 > with a few changes in my data-layout to mimic what I see other origins do; this
 > contained something like 38 builds across 4 different revisions (with brand new
 > revisions IDs), but I cannot see anything on the UI: I just keep seeing the old
 > push from yesterday.
 >
 > JSON seems valid and kcidb-submit does not report any error even using -l DEBUG.
 > (I pushed >30mins ago)
 >
 > Any idea ?
 >
 > Thanks
 >
 > Cristian
 >
 >> Nick
 >>
 >> On 9/17/20 7:22 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote:
 >>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 04:52:30PM +0300, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
 >>>> Hi Christian,
 >>>>
 >>>> On 9/17/20 3:50 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote:
 >>>>> Hi Nikolai,
 >>>>>
 >>>>> I work at ARM in the Kernel team and, in short, we'd like certainly to
 >>>>> contribute our internal Kernel test results to KCIDB.
 >>>>
 >>>> Wonderful!
 >>>>
 >>>>> After having attended your LPC2020 TestMC and KernelCI/BoF, I've now cooked
 >>>>> up some KCIDB JSON test report (seemingly valid against your KCIDB v3 schema)
 >>>>> and I'd like to start experimenting with kci-submit (on non-production
 >>>>> instances), so as to assess how to fit our results into your schema and maybe
 >>>>> contribute with some new KCIDB requirements if strictly needed.
 >>>>
 >>>> Great, this is exactly what we need, welcome aboard :)
 >>>>
 >>>> Please don't hesitate to reach out on kernelci@groups.io or on #kernelci on
 >>>> freenode.net, if you have any questions, problems, or requirements.
 >>>>
 >>>>> Is it possible to get some valid credentials and a playground instance to
 >>>>> point at ?
 >>>>
 >>>> Absolutely, I created credentials for you and sent them in a separate message.
 >>>>
 >>>> You can use origin "arm" for the start, unless you have multiple CI systems
 >>>> and want to differentiate them somehow in your reports.
 >>>>
 >>>> Nick
 >>>>
 >>>    Thanks !
 >>>
 >>> It works too ... :D
 >>>
 >>> https://staging.kernelci.org:3000/d/build/build?orgId=1&var-dataset=playground_kernelci04&var-id=arm:2020-07-07:d3d7689c2cc9503266cac3bc777bb4ddae2e5f2e
 >>>
 >>> ..quick question though....given that now I'll have to play quite a bit
 >>> with it and see how's better to present our data, if anythinjg missing etc etc,
 >>> is there any chance (or way) that if I submmit the same JSON report multiple
 >>> times with slight differences here and there (but with the same IDs clearly)
 >>> I'll get my DB updated in the bits I have changed: as an example I've just
 >>> resubmitted the same report with added discovery_time and descriptions, and got
 >>> NO errors, but I cannot see the changes in the UI (unless they have still to
 >>> propagate...)..or maybe I can obtain the same effect by dropping my dataset
 >>> before re-submitting ?
 >>>
 >>> Regards
 >>>
 >>> Thanks
 >>>
 >>> Cristian
 >>>
 >>>> On 9/17/20 3:50 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote:
 >>>>> Hi Nikolai,
 >>>>>
 >>>>> I work at ARM in the Kernel team and, in short, we'd like certainly to
 >>>>> contribute our internal Kernel test results to KCIDB.
 >>>>>
 >>>>> After having attended your LPC2020 TestMC and KernelCI/BoF, I've now cooked
 >>>>> up some KCIDB JSON test report (seemingly valid against your KCIDB v3 schema)
 >>>>> and I'd like to start experimenting with kci-submit (on non-production
 >>>>> instances), so as to assess how to fit our results into your schema and maybe
 >>>>> contribute with some new KCIDB requirements if strictly needed.
 >>>>>
 >>>>> Is it possible to get some valid credentials and a playground instance to
 >>>>> point at ?
 >>>>>
 >>>>> Thanks
 >>>>>
 >>>>> Regards
 >>>>>
 >>>>> Cristian
 >>>>>
 >>>>>
 >>>>>
 >>>>>
 >>>>>
 >>>>
 >>>
 >>
 >
 >
 > 
 >
 >