{ "comments": [ { "unresolved": false, "key": { "uuid": "17570255_f92daf4c", "filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL", "patchSetId": 2 }, "lineNbr": 0, "author": { "id": 7233 }, "writtenOn": "2022-12-07T04:53:24Z", "side": 1, "message": "much better... man the state of the tests in swift-bench are horrible. A test would be good, but there doesn\u0027t seem to be much test infrastructure setup.\nSo that may be out of scope for your change, unless you want to work on some :) ", "revId": "0fe85015dbef0655f70fcdb0084f1a37ec169924", "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543" }, { "unresolved": false, "key": { "uuid": "5d57c440_5bc08944", "filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL", "patchSetId": 2 }, "lineNbr": 0, "author": { "id": 7233 }, "writtenOn": "2022-12-07T07:00:57Z", "side": 1, "message": "Created https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/swift-bench/+/866826 as an attempt to start some test scaffolding for the swiftbench cli at least.", "revId": "0fe85015dbef0655f70fcdb0084f1a37ec169924", "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543" }, { "unresolved": false, "key": { "uuid": "f36abaf1_853fd02c", "filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL", "patchSetId": 2 }, "lineNbr": 0, "author": { "id": 1179 }, "writtenOn": "2023-02-03T19:58:36Z", "side": 1, "message": "i don\u0027t think hiding the _0 with num_containers \u003d 1 actually works yet\n\nthe --container-name on the command line seems to override the conf option\n\nthe lack of testing in this project means we\u0027re wasting a lot of time on functional validation and it might be worth some small investment if we\u0027re going to develop it further.", "revId": "0fe85015dbef0655f70fcdb0084f1a37ec169924", "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543" }, { "unresolved": false, "key": { "uuid": "752a3ff9_01863b12", "filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL", "patchSetId": 2 }, "lineNbr": 0, "author": { "id": 15343 }, "writtenOn": "2023-02-17T22:42:31Z", "side": 1, "message": "Do we like the direction Matt\u0027s taking with https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/swift-bench/+/866826? Assuming we do, I might work on a optparse-\u003eargparse patch on top of it, then stack *this* on top of *that*...", "revId": "0fe85015dbef0655f70fcdb0084f1a37ec169924", "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543" }, { "unresolved": true, "key": { "uuid": "5bc884e3_43116cdc", "filename": "bin/swift-bench", "patchSetId": 2 }, "lineNbr": 121, "author": { "id": 1179 }, "writtenOn": "2023-02-03T19:58:36Z", "side": 1, "message": "i guess this is the main point of the change... it seems like we already support this option via config file?", "revId": "0fe85015dbef0655f70fcdb0084f1a37ec169924", "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543" }, { "unresolved": true, "key": { "uuid": "a86240a7_01121d55", "filename": "bin/swift-bench", "patchSetId": 2 }, "lineNbr": 164, "author": { "id": 1179 }, "writtenOn": "2023-02-03T19:58:36Z", "side": 1, "message": "i notice in this branch we convert options.num_containers to an int before we use it as such\n\nOMM when I tried to test this with `num_containers \u003d 1` in my bench.conf on my vsaio, I still got a container named `d9b155a78c3e41ccbdf2457ee55a2de8_0`\n\nusing pdb it appears this is because `options.num_containers \u003d\u003d \u00271\u0027` but `options.num_containers \u003d\u003d 1` is False", "revId": "0fe85015dbef0655f70fcdb0084f1a37ec169924", "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543" }, { "unresolved": true, "key": { "uuid": "e666687a_2d07b8ce", "filename": "bin/swift-bench", "patchSetId": 2 }, "lineNbr": 164, "author": { "id": 15343 }, "writtenOn": "2023-02-17T22:42:31Z", "side": 1, "message": "Yeah, we probably should add `type\u003dint` all over the place when we\u0027re defining the parser.\n\nAlso, we should switch to argparse.\n\nOr, if that\u0027s a bit much yak to shave, just check `if int(options.num_containers) \u003d\u003d 1`.", "parentUuid": "a86240a7_01121d55", "revId": "0fe85015dbef0655f70fcdb0084f1a37ec169924", "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543" } ] }