e2e: enhance application failover testing

[zhzhuang-zju]

What type of PR is this?
/kind flake

What this PR does / why we need it:
When GracePeriodSeconds is configured by the user, if an application becomes unhealthy and triggers an application failover, it will wait for GracePeriodSeconds before deleting the unhealthy replicas in that cluster. In e2e tests, we cannot accurately determine the total time for the entire application failover, so we can only make a relative comparison. The current start time of the application failover is not precise enough, leading to occasional failures in judgment.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Part of #6841

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

None.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @zhzhuang-zju, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the reliability of end-to-end application failover tests. It specifically targets an issue where the timing of failover events, particularly when GracePeriodSeconds is configured, was not accurately captured, leading to test flakiness. By refining the timestamp capture mechanism to record the start time earlier, the PR ensures a more precise measurement of failover duration, thereby improving test stability.

Highlights

• E2E Test Reliability: Improved the accuracy of application failover time measurement in e2e tests by adjusting the beginTime capture point. This addresses flakiness caused by imprecise timing when GracePeriodSeconds is involved.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[zhzhuang-zju]

cc @XiShanYongYe-Chang

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request addresses a flaky e2e test for application failover. The change correctly moves the start time measurement (beginTime = time.Now()) to before the creation of the OverridePolicy. This ensures that the time taken for the policy creation API call is included in the total failover duration measurement, making the test assertion more robust and less prone to timing-related failures. The change is logical and directly addresses the problem described. The code looks good.

[codecov-commenter]

⚠️ Please install the to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 45.65%. Comparing base (3bdee54) to head (9e74488).
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #6845   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   45.64%   45.65%           
=======================================
  Files         692      692           
  Lines       57580    57580           
=======================================
+ Hits        26283    26286    +3     
+ Misses      29658    29656    -2     
+ Partials     1639     1638    -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	45.65% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

Isn't adding some logs convenient for later troubleshooting when encountering problems?

[zhzhuang-zju]

Isn't adding some logs convenient for later troubleshooting when encountering problems?

Good idea! done~

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

Let's merge it first and see if the occasional errors still occur.
/lgtm
/approve

[karmada-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: XiShanYongYe-Chang

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• test/OWNERS [XiShanYongYe-Chang]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[zhzhuang-zju]

Let's merge it first and see if the occasional errors still occur. /lgtm /approve

@XiShanYongYe-Chang Should we backport this to previous releases?