Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Project Name:

  • Proposed name for the project: ONAP Benchmark
  • Proposed name for the repository: obenk

Project description:

  • The ONAP Benchmark project aims to provide Function/Performance/Scalability/Security test for ONAP component/module/system level.

  • Finding bottleneck for E2E system and making advice for corresponding module for code improvement. 

  • Making test report for ONAP developer/user/cooperator.

  • ONAP Benchmark develops auto test environment and auto test scripts/use cases.

Scope:

  • Levels

    • Component level: Workflow Engine(Aria Camunda DG) / Database(Graph Database)

    • Module level: SO / DCAE / SDNC / A&AI /…

    • System level: E2E test for release use case

  • ONAP Benchmark test

    • Functional test

    • Performance test

    • Stability test
    • Scalability test
    • Consistency test

    • Stress Test

    • ...

Current Resources and Scope for R2:

Specific Test for R2:

Test Point

Consistency

Performance

Function

Scalability

SO





√ Workflow Engine

BPMN/BPEL

Order/s—CPU--Memory

All Funtions

Cluster

  • Aria





  • Camunda/Activiti





  • DG





DCAE





  • Ves



All Functions







Database





  • Graph Database


Based on Service/Use Case (Service model)









Specific Input and Output:



ONAP Benchmark (OBenk) test KPI:

KPI

Description

Query Per Second


Single request maximum response time


Maximum support specification capacity


Funtion points


Maintainable reliability


Reconciliation function

Configuration reservation after device restart

Architecture Alignment:

Other Information:

  • Link to seed code (if applicable)
  • Vendor Neutral

  • Meets Board policy (including IPR)

Key Project Facts:

Facts

Info

Jira KeyOB
Jira Project NameONAP Benchmark
Link to Wiki Space
Project IDONAP Benchmark
PTL (first and last name)Chen Yan

Release Components Name:

Components Name

Components Repository name

Maven Group ID

Components Description

ONAP Benchmark
org.onap.




Resources committed to the Release:

Note 1: No more than 5 committers per project. Balance the committers list and avoid members representing only one company. Ensure there is at least 3 companies supporting your proposal.

Note 2: It is critical to complete all the information requested, that will help to fast forward the onboarding process.

Role

First Name Last Name

Linux Foundation ID

Email Address

Location

PTLChen Yan
chenyan.bri@chinatelecom.cnBeijing, China.
CommittersChen Yan
chenyan.bri@chinatelecom.cnBeijing, China.

Kang Xi


kang.xi@huawei.com

Bridgewater, NJ, US.

Meng Zhaoxing
meng.zhaoxing1@zte.com.cnChengdu, China

Vivien Yang
vivien.yang@intel.com

Santa Clara, CA, US.






ContributorsHuang Zonghe
huangzh.bri@chinatelecom.cnBeijing, China.

Luo Guangfeng
luogf.bri@chinatelecom.cnBeijing, China.

Kang Xi


kang.xi@huawei.com

Bridgewater, NJ, US.


Yu Wenbin
yuwb.bri@chinatelecom.cnBeijing, China.

Wang Luman
wanglm.bri@chinatelecom.cnBeijing, China.

Zhang Peng


Zhangpeng.bri@chinatelecom.cnBeijing, China.

Wan Long

wanlong.bri@chinatelecom.cn

Beijing, China.















Project Summarization:

Project Name:

  • JIRA project name: ONAP Benchmark (OBenk)
  • JIRA project prefix: obenk

Repo name: OBank
Lifecycle State:
Primary Contact:  Yan Chen (chenyan.bri@chinatelecom.cn)
Project Lead: TBD
mailing list tag [Should match Jira Project Prefix] 
Committers:
Please refer to the table above.

*Link to TSC approval: 
Link to approval of additional submitters: 


  • No labels

7 Comments

  1. Hi Yan Chen, are there plans to discuss this proposal at the ONAP F2F in December?

    1. Hi James MacNider, first thanks for your interest in this project. And about your question, Yes, we plan to discuss the ONAP Benchmark proposal at the ONAP F2F in December, and at that time, @Long Wan will be represent us giving the presentations.

      1. Hi Yan Chen, I don't see any sessions yet scheduled with Long Wan here:  December F2F Huddle Room Reservations .  Is the timing still TBD, or will this just be in the context of the overall new project review/approval session on the Wednesday morning?

        1. Hi James MacNider, the individual section is still TBD, we will let you know if there is any update. And in the mean time, it sure will be in the overall new project review/approval session. At this time, we welcome all opinions and discussions regarding our project proposals. You are more than welcomed to discuss the ONAP Benchmark with us if you are interested.

  2. Hi Yan Chen,

    Can you Attached a small record(or pics of running steps) demo, and update regarding the added value of such Tool.

    In addition please can you share how the test report should look like ?     

  3. Thank you for this proposal, as this is a key area to meet our platform maturity requirements.  One question:

    • have you coordinated with the Integration team?  There was a presentation this week about that team looking at some of the OPNFV testing tools to do performance & functional testing.  Could Benchmark perhaps be a subproject under Integration?
    1. Yes we have present this project on Integration team zoom meeting, and it could be a sub-project under Integration if approved.