Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Failing test: Jest Integration Tests.x-pack/plugins/security_solution/server/integration_tests - telemetry tasks sender configuration should use legacy sender by default #178918

Closed
kibanamachine opened this issue Mar 18, 2024 · 7 comments
Closed

Failing test: Jest Integration Tests.x-pack/plugins/security_solution/server/integration_tests - telemetry tasks sender configuration should use legacy sender by default #178918

kibanamachine opened this issue Mar 18, 2024 · 7 comments
Assignees
@szaffarano
Labels
failed-test A test failure on a tracked branch, potentially flaky-test Team: SecuritySolution Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc.

Comments

@kibanamachine
Copy link
Contributor

kibanamachine commented Mar 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

A test failed on a tracked branch

Error: expect(received).toBeGreaterThan(expected)

Expected: > 0
Received:   0
    at toBeGreaterThan (/var/lib/buildkite-agent/builds/kb-n2-4-spot-33384f5d3c9b20a5/elastic/kibana-on-merge/kibana/x-pack/plugins/security_solution/server/integration_tests/telemetry.test.ts:318:31)
    at cb (/var/lib/buildkite-agent/builds/kb-n2-4-spot-33384f5d3c9b20a5/elastic/kibana-on-merge/kibana/x-pack/plugins/security_solution/server/integration_tests/lib/helpers.ts:31:20)
    at Object.<anonymous> (/var/lib/buildkite-agent/builds/kb-n2-4-spot-33384f5d3c9b20a5/elastic/kibana-on-merge/kibana/x-pack/plugins/security_solution/server/integration_tests/telemetry.test.ts:154:24)

First failure: CI Build - main
@kibanamachine kibanamachine added the failed-test A test failure on a tracked branch, potentially flaky-test label Mar 18, 2024
@botelastic botelastic bot added the needs-team Issues missing a team label label Mar 18, 2024
@kibanamachine kibanamachine added the Team: SecuritySolution Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc. label Mar 18, 2024
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

Pinging @elastic/security-solution (Team: SecuritySolution)

@botelastic botelastic bot removed the needs-team Issues missing a team label label Mar 18, 2024
@kibanamachine
Copy link
Contributor Author

New failure: CI Build - main

mistic added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 19, 2024
@mistic
skip flaky suite (#178918)
85d2fc1
@mistic
Copy link
Member

mistic commented Mar 19, 2024

Skipped.

main: 85d2fc1

@szaffarano szaffarano self-assigned this Mar 20, 2024
@szaffarano szaffarano mentioned this issue Mar 20, 2024
Merged
@kibanamachine kibanamachine reopened this Jul 7, 2024
@kibanamachine
Copy link
Contributor Author

New failure: kibana-elasticsearch-serverless-verify-and-promote - main

@kibanamachine
Copy link
Contributor Author

New failure: kibana-on-merge - 8.15

@kibanamachine
Copy link
Contributor Author

New failure: kibana-on-merge - main

mistic added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 25, 2024
@mistic
skip flaky suite (#178918)
c3b0346
mistic added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 25, 2024
@mistic
skip flaky suite (#178918)
c978205
@mistic
Copy link
Member

mistic commented Jul 25, 2024

Skipped.

main: c3b0346
8.15: c978205

@szaffarano szaffarano mentioned this issue Aug 7, 2024
Merged
szaffarano added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 7, 2024
@szaffarano
[Telemetry][Security Solution] Fix flaky tests (#190044)
358e104 
## Summary

Fixes: #188234
#187719 and
#178918

The flakiness was while calculating the Detection Rules task
invocations. It could have two different RCs: 1) The code didn't retry
in case the task wasn't executed yet, which makes sense in a CI
environment, which is slower than a dev environment; 2) The timestamp to
filter out requests was calculated after the task was triggered, and if
the task is executed fast enough, it could lead to empty responses
because of that.
kibanamachine pushed a commit to kibanamachine/kibana that referenced this issue Aug 7, 2024
@szaffarano
[Telemetry][Security Solution] Fix flaky tests (elastic#190044)
e0ca564 
## Summary

Fixes: elastic#188234
elastic#187719 and
elastic#178918

The flakiness was while calculating the Detection Rules task
invocations. It could have two different RCs: 1) The code didn't retry
in case the task wasn't executed yet, which makes sense in a CI
environment, which is slower than a dev environment; 2) The timestamp to
filter out requests was calculated after the task was triggered, and if
the task is executed fast enough, it could lead to empty responses
because of that.

(cherry picked from commit 358e104)
kibanamachine added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 7, 2024
@kibanamachine @szaffarano
[8.15] [Telemetry][Security Solution] Fix flaky tests (#190044) (#190051
cd0bad9 
)

# Backport

This will backport the following commits from `main` to `8.15`:
- [[Telemetry][Security Solution] Fix flaky tests
(#190044)](#190044)

<!--- Backport version: 9.4.3 -->

### Questions ?
Please refer to the [Backport tool
documentation](https://github.com/sqren/backport)

<!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Sebastián
Zaffarano","email":"sebastian.zaffarano@elastic.co"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2024-08-07T13:13:13Z","message":"[Telemetry][Security
Solution] Fix flaky tests (#190044)\n\n## Summary\r\n\r\nFixes:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/188234\r\nhttps://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/187719
and\r\nhttps://github.com//issues/178918\r\n\r\nThe
flakiness was while calculating the Detection Rules task\r\ninvocations.
It could have two different RCs: 1) The code didn't retry\r\nin case the
task wasn't executed yet, which makes sense in a CI\r\nenvironment,
which is slower than a dev environment; 2) The timestamp to\r\nfilter
out requests was calculated after the task was triggered, and if\r\nthe
task is executed fast enough, it could lead to empty
responses\r\nbecause of
that.","sha":"358e104ebcc2bfcfeec3457b2e913d071d27745d","branchLabelMapping":{"^v8.16.0$":"main","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:skip","Team:
SecuritySolution","v8.15.0","v8.16.0"],"title":"[Telemetry][Security
Solution] Fix flaky
tests","number":190044,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/190044","mergeCommit":{"message":"[Telemetry][Security
Solution] Fix flaky tests (#190044)\n\n## Summary\r\n\r\nFixes:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/188234\r\nhttps://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/187719
and\r\nhttps://github.com//issues/178918\r\n\r\nThe
flakiness was while calculating the Detection Rules task\r\ninvocations.
It could have two different RCs: 1) The code didn't retry\r\nin case the
task wasn't executed yet, which makes sense in a CI\r\nenvironment,
which is slower than a dev environment; 2) The timestamp to\r\nfilter
out requests was calculated after the task was triggered, and if\r\nthe
task is executed fast enough, it could lead to empty
responses\r\nbecause of
that.","sha":"358e104ebcc2bfcfeec3457b2e913d071d27745d"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["8.15"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"8.15","label":"v8.15.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"},{"branch":"main","label":"v8.16.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v8.16.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/190044","number":190044,"mergeCommit":{"message":"[Telemetry][Security
Solution] Fix flaky tests (#190044)\n\n## Summary\r\n\r\nFixes:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/188234\r\nhttps://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/187719
and\r\nhttps://github.com//issues/178918\r\n\r\nThe
flakiness was while calculating the Detection Rules task\r\ninvocations.
It could have two different RCs: 1) The code didn't retry\r\nin case the
task wasn't executed yet, which makes sense in a CI\r\nenvironment,
which is slower than a dev environment; 2) The timestamp to\r\nfilter
out requests was calculated after the task was triggered, and if\r\nthe
task is executed fast enough, it could lead to empty
responses\r\nbecause of
that.","sha":"358e104ebcc2bfcfeec3457b2e913d071d27745d"}}]}] BACKPORT-->

Co-authored-by: Sebastián Zaffarano <sebastian.zaffarano@elastic.co>
@szaffarano szaffarano mentioned this issue Oct 1, 2024
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@szaffarano szaffarano

Labels
failed-test A test failure on a tracked branch, potentially flaky-test Team: SecuritySolution Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@szaffarano @mistic @elasticmachine @kibanamachine