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

Added unit tests for the constants/sidecar package #15044

Conversation

VaibhavMalik4187
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This commit increases the code coverage of the go/constants package to 100%

Related Issue(s)

Partially addresses: #14931

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

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Jan 26, 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 Jan 26, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v19.0.0 milestone Jan 26, 2024
@VaibhavMalik4187
Copy link
Contributor Author

@GuptaManan100, could you please review this PR whenever you have a moment? Thanks!

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 26, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (68f6922) 47.65% compared to head (4b81cb9) 47.64%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15044      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   47.65%   47.64%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1151     1153       +2     
  Lines      239762   239773      +11     
==========================================
- Hits       114251   114245       -6     
- Misses     116907   116924      +17     
  Partials     8604     8604              

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

@systay systay added Type: Testing Component: General Changes throughout the code base and 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 Jan 26, 2024
@dbussink
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think adding tests for this is useful in any way. It merely adds overhead by now having to change these twice if we have to.

Copy link
Contributor

@mattlord mattlord left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks, @VaibhavMalik4187 ! While I don't necessarily disagree with @dbussink, this does prevent us from accidentally changing the default (unlikely, but still) and if we do then it's not difficult to find and change this other location.

@VaibhavMalik4187
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks, @VaibhavMalik4187 ! While I don't necessarily disagree with @dbussink, this does prevent us from accidentally changing the default (unlikely, but still) and if we do then it's not difficult to find and change this other location.

Now that I think about what @dbussink, it makes sense. However, I didn't pay much attention to these details when I wrote the tests. I was going through the codebase and was looking for packages lacking in tests, and that's when I thought of raising this small PR.

Thanks for reviewing this.

Copy link
Member

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Whenever we change the global state in a test, we should ensure we set it back in a defer function call.

So, we should add this code to the test -

originalName := GetName()
defer func() {
    SetName(originalName)
}()

This commit increases the code coverage of the `go/constants` package to
100%

Partially addresses: vitessio#14931

Signed-off-by: VaibhavMalik4187 <[email protected]>
@VaibhavMalik4187
Copy link
Contributor Author

Whenever we change the global state in a test, we should ensure we set it back in a defer function call.

So, we should add this code to the test -

originalName := GetName()
defer func() {
    SetName(originalName)
}()

Understood, fixed in the latest version.

@GuptaManan100
Copy link
Member

After recent discussion, we have decided not to merge tests that we don't find useful.

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.

5 participants