Skip to content

Conversation

@saimedhi
Copy link
Contributor

Description

  • fix indices.simulate_index_template test spec

Check List

  • Functionality includes testing.
  • API changes companion pull request created, if applicable.
  • Public documentation issue/PR created, if applicable.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

Signed-off-by: saimedhi <saimedhi@amazon.com>
@saimedhi saimedhi requested a review from a team as a code owner May 29, 2025 18:42
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

✅ Gradle check result for a4a730c: SUCCESS

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 29, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 72.70%. Comparing base (fe4a98d) to head (a4a730c).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #18399      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     72.60%   72.70%   +0.09%     
- Complexity    67682    67776      +94     
============================================
  Files          5497     5497              
  Lines        311819   311819              
  Branches      45265    45265              
============================================
+ Hits         226409   226702     +293     
+ Misses        66941    66641     -300     
- Partials      18469    18476       +7     

☔ 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.

@saimedhi
Copy link
Contributor Author

saimedhi commented May 29, 2025

@owaiskazi19 , @andrross , @dbwiddis please take a look at this PR. And let me know if any change needed.

@andrross
Copy link
Member

@saimedhi Can you explain why this change is required?

@saimedhi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@saimedhi Can you explain why this change is required?

@andrross, I am seeing a test failure in opensearch python client. Same issue observed in other clients as well.
https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-py/actions/runs/15337138495/job/43156422037?pr=907

I debugged this issue and noticed response obtained after sequence of actions mentioned in test spec is {}

So, asserting response body with {} should be done in test spec.

Currently suggesting to change as below:

- match: { $body: {} }

Previously :

- match: {body: null}

@andrross
Copy link
Member

@saimedhi But why does this not cause an issue in this repository if the spec is not correct?

@andrross
Copy link
Member

@saimedhi I'm going to merge this because I fully believe you that the actual response is {} instead of null :) But can you look into why this didn't cause a failure in the tests here?

@andrross andrross merged commit 3c0813f into opensearch-project:main May 30, 2025
34 of 35 checks passed
Gagan6164 pushed a commit to Gagan6164/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2025
Signed-off-by: saimedhi <saimedhi@amazon.com>
Gagan6164 pushed a commit to Gagan6164/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2025
Signed-off-by: saimedhi <saimedhi@amazon.com>
abhita pushed a commit to abhita/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Jun 9, 2025
Signed-off-by: saimedhi <saimedhi@amazon.com>
neuenfeldttj pushed a commit to neuenfeldttj/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Jun 26, 2025
Signed-off-by: saimedhi <saimedhi@amazon.com>Signed-off-by: TJ Neuenfeldt <tjneu@amazon.com>
neuenfeldttj pushed a commit to neuenfeldttj/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Jun 26, 2025
Signed-off-by: saimedhi <saimedhi@amazon.com>
tandonks pushed a commit to tandonks/OpenSearch that referenced this pull request Aug 5, 2025
Signed-off-by: saimedhi <saimedhi@amazon.com>
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.

4 participants