E2E tests for Cloud Run hello-broken and logging-manual samples #3971
Conversation
googlebot
added
the
cla: yes
dinagraves
changed the title
run/logging-manual/e2e_test.py
Outdated
| assert entries | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def stackdriver_request(service_name, project, access_token): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Why not use client library?
- I notice no retries, it's been found necessary in Node.js and Golang to avoid flakiness:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated to add retries.
Updated to the client library. The reason why I didn't use it as first is because doing the direct HTTP calls is generally easier. The documentation for the client libraries is often not great. By contrast, I can use the API explorer to figure out the correct API call and then copy the HTTP request from the UI.
| # to 'BUILD_SPECIFIC_GCLOUD_PROJECT' if you want to opt in using a | ||
| # build specific Cloud project. You can also use your own string | ||
| # to use your own Cloud project. | ||
| 'gcloud_project_env': 'GCLOUD_PROJECT', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
GCLOUD_PROJECT is deprecated in GAE at least, in favor of GOOGLE_CLOUD_PROJECT which I see used elsewhere in this PR. Should this be standardized?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@GoogleCloudPlatform/python-samples-owners We should probably switch to GOOGLE_CLOUD_PROJECT in this repo. Opened #4019
Tests for hello-broken and logging-manual.
Original plan was to do all the e2e-tests in one PR, but the logging-manual one got a little more complicated.
Using the Stackdriver API to check that the message logged properly, as this is the main feature of the sample & tutorial. I can be convinced to use the python client instead of the HTTP call.