e2e/standard: test for backup & restore with passphrase #1369
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
alxndrsn
commented
Jan 15, 2025
alxndrsn
commented
Jan 15, 2025
alxndrsn
commented
Jan 15, 2025
alxndrsn
commented
Jan 21, 2025
added 21 commits
January 21, 2025 13:02
This reverts commit 5b832d9.
ktuite
approved these changes
Feb 4, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Inspired by #1309 (review), this adds tests for backup/restore with a passphrase.
What has been done to verify that this works as intended?
CI - it adds new tests.
Why is this the best possible solution? Were any other approaches considered?
Testing backup/restore with a real, running server is much simpler than integration testing the same functionality, and because it fakes less code it's more likely to catch real problems with the process.
How does this change affect users? Describe intentional changes to behavior and behavior that could have accidentally been affected by code changes. In other words, what are the regression risks?
It should not affect users. As this PR only changes test code, regression risks are low.
Does this change require updates to the API documentation? If so, please update docs/api.yaml as part of this PR.
No.
Before submitting this PR, please make sure you have:
make testand confirmed all checks still pass OR confirm CircleCI build passes