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

VStreamer unit tests: refactor pending test #15845

Merged

Conversation

rohit-nayak-ps
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Final PR on porting over the vstreamer unit tests. Only one test TestJSON has been ported. Remaining ones are too specific and will require disproportional changes in the test framework for each test and those have been left as-is.

Related Issue(s)

#14903

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
  • If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented May 6, 2024

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels May 6, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v20.0.0 milestone May 6, 2024
@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels May 6, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 6, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.45%. Comparing base (0353ad4) to head (2f48679).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #15845   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   68.45%   68.45%           
=======================================
  Files        1559     1559           
  Lines      196825   196825           
=======================================
+ Hits       134736   134737    +1     
+ Misses      62089    62088    -1     

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

@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps marked this pull request as ready for review May 6, 2024 13:49
@@ -511,8 +511,12 @@ func (ts *TestSpec) getFieldEvent(table *schemadiff.CreateTableEntity) *TestFiel
tc.len = int64(len(col.Type.EnumValues) + 1)
tc.colType = fmt.Sprintf("%s(%s)", tc.dataTypeLowered, strings.Join(col.Type.EnumValues, ","))
ts.metadata[getMetadataKey(table.Name(), tc.name)] = col.Type.EnumValues
case "json":
tc.colType = "json"
tc.len = lengthJSON
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You probably already know, but this is the length of a longblob (2^32 - 1) type because that's what is used within InnoDB for the JSON storage:

Might be worth a comment since some of the length consts we have are not for a given type but the current usage (e.g. the SET ones).

It's only relevant in that these lengths are tied to types. So at some point we may add mediumblob/mediumtext longblob/longtext etc fields too. So I'm only thinking of how this might be (more) obvious to future readers / writers.

default:
log.Infof(fmt.Sprintf("unknown sqlTypeString %s", tc.dataTypeLowered))
ts.t.Fatalf("unknown sqlTypeString %s", tc.dataTypeLowered)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should not be using t.Fatal in new code but using require.Fail[Now] instead. We've had efforts to remove/replace this usage across the code base in the past so we shouldn't introduce new usage -- that's my thinking.

for l < col.len {
val = append(val, "\x00"...)
l++
}
case "json":
sval := strings.Trim(string(val), "'")
sval = strings.Replace(sval, "\\", "", -1)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit, but IMO strings.ReplaceAll is a bit more clear.

@systay systay changed the title VStrreamer unit tests: refactor pending test VStreamer unit tests: refactor pending test May 8, 2024
Signed-off-by: Rohit Nayak <rohit@planetscale.com>
… for now

Signed-off-by: Rohit Nayak <rohit@planetscale.com>
Signed-off-by: Rohit Nayak <rohit@planetscale.com>
@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps force-pushed the rohit/vstreamer-unit-test-refactor4 branch from 6749832 to 778ea66 Compare May 10, 2024 12:08
Signed-off-by: Rohit Nayak <rohit@planetscale.com>
Signed-off-by: Rohit Nayak <rohit@planetscale.com>
@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps merged commit f2d6281 into vitessio:main May 10, 2024
93 checks passed
@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps deleted the rohit/vstreamer-unit-test-refactor4 branch May 10, 2024 13:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants