Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here I decided to create a subclass because the base test is already using data providers
2cd8597 to
33aaa5e
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test was incorrect. It was always running as multi stage while some test actually call setUseMultiStageQueryEngine in order to do some things with V1
33aaa5e to
266a602
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #11404 +/- ##
=============================================
+ Coverage 14.51% 63.04% +48.53%
- Complexity 201 1107 +906
=============================================
Files 2320 2320
Lines 124658 124658
Branches 19031 19031
=============================================
+ Hits 18095 78593 +60498
+ Misses 105031 40465 -64566
- Partials 1532 5600 +4068
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 1499 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
266a602 to
2a7d935
Compare
763bd5b to
9b3f50e
Compare
9b3f50e to
f2125d3
Compare
...est/java/org/apache/pinot/integration/tests/OfflineClusterServerCPUTimeQueryKillingTest.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
014cd7e to
2fc610c
Compare
|
seems more tests to fix due to error code. |
|
Yeah, my other commits were merged :D |
| }; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| protected void notSupportedInV2() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
per discussion with @gortiz This was added to skip V2 when there's test failure. however some test cases actually sequentially ran though the queries. so if the earlier one fails. there's no way to capture the latter ones.
we should switch to a provider pattern otherwise the sequential query run will not capture enough
We want to improve the test coverage when using multi stage engine.
In this PR I'm repeating in V2 some test that previously were only in V1