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

Y24-327 - scRNA Core bulk test #1925

Closed
4 tasks done
KatyTaylor opened this issue Sep 16, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by sanger/sequencescape#4400
Closed
4 tasks done

Y24-327 - scRNA Core bulk test #1925

KatyTaylor opened this issue Sep 16, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by sanger/sequencescape#4400
Assignees
Labels
scRNA - cDNA prep scRNA Size: M Medium - medium effort & risk

Comments

@KatyTaylor
Copy link
Contributor

KatyTaylor commented Sep 16, 2024

User story
As a user of the scRNA Core pipeline, I would like to be confident that the pipeline will work for the volume of samples and size of pools that I'm planning to put through the end to end test.

Who are the primary contacts for this story
Abby, Andrew, Katy

Who is the nominated tester for UAT
This doesn't need UAT, it just needs the test to pass in the UAT and/or training envs.

Acceptance criteria
To be considered successful the solution must allow:

  • Discuss this story with Abby when she's back on 23/9/24. If she is planning to do a realistic test manually for UAT, then it's probably not worth creating this new automated test, and we should focus on completing the other stories.
  • Create or update the scRNA Core Integration Suite tests to be close to what R&D are planning for their end to end test:
    • 10 samples per pool, 8 pools per chip
    • 24 samples per pool, 8 pools per chip [It can be configured to do this]

Dependencies
The development of the test is not blocked by the following, however we need to check it passes after the following are done:

@KatyTaylor KatyTaylor added Size: M Medium - medium effort & risk scRNA scRNA - cDNA prep and removed scRNA - cDNA prep labels Sep 16, 2024
@psd-issuer psd-issuer bot changed the title scRNA Core bulk test Y24-327 - scRNA Core bulk test Sep 16, 2024
@yoldas yoldas self-assigned this Sep 26, 2024
@yoldas
Copy link
Member

yoldas commented Sep 30, 2024

For recent UAT sessions, we have used the following integration suite branch: scrna_core_pipeline_volume_test, particularly the test spec/limber/scrna_core_volume_spec.rb

It allows specifying parameters for number of runs, number of vac tubes each run, etc. However it only covers the usual 'scRNA Core entry point 1 - LRC Blood Vac tubes' scenario. It has all steps in separate methods so disabling calls to them becomes easy in the main flow.

I am looking into

  • Well failing makes it difficult to track later stages and causes an error in full plates.
  • Getting updates from the original scRNA Core tests, such as adding bulk submission step.

@yoldas
Copy link
Member

yoldas commented Oct 8, 2024

I have written a volume test which covers Blood Banking, cDNA Prep, and Library Prep. It can be configured using the let blocks. I have set the config to make 7 banking runs. From each run we pick 8 Seq and 2 Spare tubes. We also add 10 Input tubes to those to make 80 tubes going into pooling.
GitLab MR: https://gitlab.internal.sanger.ac.uk/psd/integration-suite/-/merge_requests/177

Local Run: ENVIRONMENT=local DEBUG_ON_FAIL=true bundle exec rspec spec/limber/scrna_core_volume_spec.rb

Running it against uat and training environments needs Sequencescape UAT action for randomised FluidX barcodes to be deployed (merged into develop already).

@yoldas
Copy link
Member

yoldas commented Oct 11, 2024

The Sequencescape UAT action for generating FluidX barcodes is deployed to UAT. I will run the bulk test against UAT using GitLab.

@yoldas yoldas added On Hold On hold and removed On Hold On hold labels Oct 23, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
scRNA - cDNA prep scRNA Size: M Medium - medium effort & risk
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants