Update CI to account for multiple types of relayers #3043
Conversation
| @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ | |||
| "test": [ | |||
| "TestClientUpdateProposal_Succeeds" | |||
| ], | |||
| "relayer-type": ["COSMOS"], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this change as it currently stands will not change the number of tests that run, once a second entry is added (HERMES) this will double the number of tests that run in each compatibility test matrix.
e.g. "relayer-type": ["COSMOS", "HERMES"],
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we call them golang and rust instead of cosmos and hermes? not super opinionated here but jw
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hm I agree golang could work, but I don't think rust would be a good name, the language doesn't really matter for a relayer I feel like the explicit name is more valuable information (as you could have many relayers written in rust or golang. )
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think my vote would be for the binary name in lowercase. E.g. hermes or rly
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah I'm happy with hermes/rly
| relayer-type: | ||
| default: COSMOS | ||
| description: 'The relayer to use' | ||
| required: true | ||
| type: choice | ||
| options: | ||
| - COSMOS | ||
| - HERMES |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
adds a drop down when running a single test.
| RELAYER_TAG: "${{ inputs.relayer-tag }}" | ||
| RELAYER_TYPE: "${{ inputs.relayer-type }}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is the workflow that gets imported in other workflows
e2e/relayer/relayer.go
Outdated
| func newHermesRelayer() ibc.Relayer { | ||
| panic("hermes relayer not yet implemented for ibctest") | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
place holder function to flesh out once the hermes implementation exists.
e2e/relayer/relayer.go
Outdated
| func newCosmosRelayer(t *testing.T, tag string, logger *zap.Logger, dockerClient *dockerclient.Client, network string) ibc.Relayer { | ||
| customImageOption := relayer.CustomDockerImage(cosmosRelayerRepository, tag, cosmosRelayerUser) | ||
| relayerProcessingOption := relayer.StartupFlags("-p", "events") // relayer processes via events | ||
|
|
||
| relayerFactory := ibctest.NewBuiltinRelayerFactory(ibc.CosmosRly, logger, customImageOption, relayerProcessingOption) | ||
|
|
||
| return relayerFactory.Build( | ||
| t, dockerClient, network, | ||
| ) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this function we already had and was just moved.
e2e/testconfig/testconfig.go
Outdated
| if rlyTag == "" { | ||
| if relayerType == relayer.Cosmos { | ||
| rlyTag = defaultCosmosRelayerTag | ||
| } | ||
| if relayerType == relayer.Hermes { | ||
| // TODO: set default hermes version | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this one env var has to have 2 different defaults depending on the relayer type. If additional relayers are added, this could be moved to a map, with just two I decided to keep it simple.
chatton
requested review from
colin-axner,
AdityaSripal,
crodriguezvega,
charleenfei and
damiannolan
as code owners
…g-multiple-relayers-in-our-e2e
…relayers-in-our-e2e' of https://github.com/cosmos/ibc-go into cian/issue#3041-add-wiring-to-support-running-multiple-relayers-in-our-e2e
…g-multiple-relayers-in-our-e2e
…g-multiple-relayers-in-our-e2e
…g-multiple-relayers-in-our-e2e
…g-multiple-relayers-in-our-e2e
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3043 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 78.53% 78.54%
=======================================
Files 179 179
Lines 12436 12440 +4
=======================================
+ Hits 9767 9771 +4
Misses 2243 2243
Partials 426 426
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you, @chatton. Looking forward to running the tests with hermes as well. :)
…g-multiple-relayers-in-our-e2e
chatton
deleted the
cian/issue#3041-add-wiring-to-support-running-multiple-relayers-in-our-e2e
branch
Description
closes: #3041
Commit Message / Changelog Entry
N/A
see the guidelines for commit messages. (view raw markdown for examples)
Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.
docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/).godoccomments.Files changedin the Github PR explorer.Codecov Reportin the comment section below once CI passes.