[Lustre-discuss] Metadata storage in test script files

[Chris]

On 02/05/2012 16:44, Roman wrote:
>
>> I think this is something that needs to live outside the test metadata
>> being described here.  The definition of "golden configuration" is
>> hard to define, and depends heavily on factors that change from one
>> environment to the next.
> We could separate dynamic and static metadata. But it will be good if
> both set of data use one engine and storage type with just different
> sources.

I think we all understand the static metadata and I believe that the 
data in my original examples is static data. This data relates to a 
version of the test scripts and so can live as part of the test script 
managed using the same git mechanisms.

Could you explain what you mean by dynamic data so that we can all 
understand exactly what you are suggesting we store.

> Also, I don't see good way to use 'metadata inheritance' way in shell 
> without adding pretty unclear shell code, so switch to metadata usage 
> should be one-monent or test framework just ignore it and metadata 
> became just static text for external scripts. 

I'm not sure if there is a place for inheritance in this particular 
situation but if there is then we need to be clear of one thing. There 
can be no implicit inheritance for these scripts. I.e. We can't have a 
single attribute at the top of a file that applies to all tests. The 
reason for this is because one major reason for having metadata is that 
we cause the data to be collected properly, each test needs to have the 
data explicitly captured. If a test does not have the data captured then 
we do not have any data - and no data is a fact (data) in itself, If a 
test inherits data from another test then that must have be explicitly set.

We cannot allow sweeping inheritance that allows us to imagine we have 
learnt something when actually we've just taken a short cut to give the 
impression of knowledge.

Chris