Skip to content

Conversation

@antgonza
Copy link
Member

This definitely wasn't an easy fix: @adswafford.

Displaying the parent's processing name beside the artifacts was already implemented. However, the implementation assumed that each default_parameter_set was unique, which is not true (lots of 'Defaults') and the code was "getting confused" between them. This is solved in these code changes. I also made the search/match of parameters per command so that steps happens faster.

Additionally, we realized that for some reason (still looking into this) there is a difference between the trimming version in Qiita. The difference is that the length is being stored as string/int - this is the only command in the full database that has this problem (checked several times, this morning again). Thus, we need to discuss this during tomorrow's meeting.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Oct 17, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #2356 into dev will increase coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev    #2356      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.77%   93.77%   +<.01%     
==========================================
  Files         163      163              
  Lines       18593    18597       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits        17436    17440       +4     
  Misses       1157     1157
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...pet/handlers/study_handlers/tests/test_artifact.py 97.19% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
...iita_pet/handlers/api_proxy/tests/test_artifact.py 98.22% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
qiita_db/test/test_util.py 99.63% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
qiita_db/util.py 96.91% <100%> (+0.02%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5f5b61f...19f2b07. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@josenavas josenavas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just one comment

SELECT parameter_set_name, array_agg(parameter_set) AS param_set
FROM qiita.default_parameter_set
GROUP BY parameter_set_name"""
sql_params = """SELECT default_parameter_set_id, command_id,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think in this query the param_set value will always have a single value. In the GROUP BY clause you've included the "default_parameter_set_id" which is the primary key of the table "default_parameter_set". Thus, it is impossible for two rows in the table to have the same default_parameter_set_id.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

right and in the code below we are only getting the first value [0], changing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants