PCP cross-version compatibility QA

Following this observation from Frank, ...

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [pcp] pcp updates: libpcp connection unsharing
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 08:11:14 -0500
From: Frank Ch. Eigler <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]

Hi, Mark -

> Ok, thanks Frank - so we need to retain connection sharing
> server-side for downrev clients.  But new clients would no longer
> use it. We need downrev clients exercising QA for uprev pmcd. And
> similarly, QA for uprev clients talking to downrev pmcd. None of
> this QA exists .. [...]

This type of compatibility QA seems beyond pcp or pcpqa code, more
like a QA farm responsibility.  Once a suite of older-version hosts is
kept, using them is a matter of site-specific qa/qa_hosts.* lines.  Do
we have such a QA farm already?  (If not, how have we been confirming
cross-version compatibility?)

--------

I've created a new VM in my QA farm (vm35) that is running the most 
recent Ubuntu LTS release (16.04) and checked out the oldest PCP version 
that I could easily build and run there.

This turned out to be PCP as of nearly 8 years ago ...

pcpqa@vm35:~/qa$ pcp
Performance Co-Pilot configuration on vm35.localdomain:

  platform: Linux vm35 4.2.0-27-generic #32~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jan 
22 15:32:26 UTC 2016 x86_64
  hardware: 1 cpu, 1 disk, 992MB RAM
  timezone: AEDT-11
      pmcd: Version 2.7.8-20081224, 5 agents, 1 client
      pmda: pmcd sample sampledso linux simple
  pmlogger: primary logger: /var/log/pcp/pmlogger/vm35/20161116.09.26

And the QA suite at this time was in a separate git repo, so extracting 
that and checking out to a similar point in time and a little tweaking 
produces ...

pcpqa@vm35:~/qa$ check -g sanity
...
Not run: 207 208 210 249 256 263 1044
Passed all 44 tests

But most importantly, the new (when I commit it) and soon to be expanded 
qa/905 reports success for these cases between bozo (latest and 
greatest, PCP 3.11.6 and vm35, PCP 2.7.8) ...

kenj@bozo:~/src/pcp/qa$ 905
QA output created by 905
Clients locally, down-rev remote pmcd ...
--- pmval ---
...

--- torture_api ---
...

Clients on down-rev host, local pmcd ...
--- pmval ---
...

--- torture_api ---
...

So there is some evidence to show that despite not having an explicit 
test harness in place (until now), project and engineeering discipline 
has ensured that there has been no botching of the core PCP protocols 
over at least the last eight years and new/old PMAPI clients will 
continue to work with old/new pmcds.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
pcp mailing list
[email protected]
https://groups.io/g/pcp/messages
-=-=-
Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#14705): https://groups.io/g/pcp/message/14705
View All Messages In Topic (1): https://groups.io/g/pcp/topic/3144437
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/3144437?uid=174580
New Topic: https://groups.io/g/pcp/post

Change Your Subscription: https://groups.io/g/pcp/editsub?uid=174580

Group Home: https://groups.io/g/pcp
Contact Group Owner: [email protected]

Terms of Service: https://groups.io/static/tos

Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/pcp/leave/354243/563757577/xyzzy
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-