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.

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

Test query parameters #46

Open
FighterNan opened this issue Aug 15, 2022 · 5 comments
Open

Test query parameters #46

FighterNan opened this issue Aug 15, 2022 · 5 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@FighterNan
Copy link

Is query parameters testing in the roadmap of this repo?

If so, what's the planned workflow? I would imagine we firstly check the |ProtocolFeaturesSupported| on service root, if certain parameters are supported, we pick some resources (or walk through every resource), apply query parameters on them, and finally check the result according to these rules:

  1. only; response shall be exactly the same as querying the resource directly
  2. expand; response shall be exactly the same as querying the list of sub-resources sequentially
  3. select; selected properties and values shall be exactly the same as they are in the original response; revered properties are turned regardlessly
  4. filter; pending..

Any better ideas?

@mraineri
Copy link
Contributor

We currently have that testing done under the Redfish-Usecase-Checkers project here: https://github.com/DMTF/Redfish-Usecase-Checkers/tree/master/query_parameters

@mraineri
Copy link
Contributor

I do wonder if it's worth migrating that testing to the protocol validator though; now that I think about it a bit more, it's not really a "usecase".

@jautor do you have any opinion?

@jautor
Copy link
Member

jautor commented Aug 16, 2022

There's certainly some amount of validation we should do in the Protocol-Validator since we can detect the support based on the ProtocolFeaturesSupported. But there may be limits on what we can reasonably test consistently across implementations - so I expect we'd still have more exhaustive (and more flexible) test cases in the use case checker regardless.

@mraineri
Copy link
Contributor

I think given the scope of the existing usecase checker, we can add the same determinism since it also is relying on service root to "discover" what is supported. At this time, there's nothing too exotic in my opinion.

@mraineri mraineri transferred this issue from DMTF/Redfish-Service-Validator Aug 26, 2022
@mraineri
Copy link
Contributor

Migrated issue to the protocol validator (service validator is strictly resource conformance against schema).

@mraineri mraineri added the enhancement New feature or request label Jun 26, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants