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

cleanup: make sure we use the right Offset #15576

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 26, 2024

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Mar 26, 2024

Description

Minor clean-up: we were looking for *Offset, but the type used is Offset.
The end-result was the same, but we were taking an unnecessarily long way to get there.

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Mar 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 Mar 26, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v20.0.0 milestone Mar 26, 2024
@systay systay added Type: Internal Cleanup Component: Query Serving 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 Mar 26, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 26, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 65.75%. Comparing base (696fe0e) to head (9247cad).
Report is 153 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15576      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.41%   65.75%   -1.67%     
==========================================
  Files        1560     1561       +1     
  Lines      192752   194830    +2078     
==========================================
- Hits       129952   128107    -1845     
- Misses      62800    66723    +3923     

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

@dbussink
Copy link
Contributor

The end-result was the same, but we were taking an unnecessarily long way to get there.

Do we need to back port this to stay consistent?

@systay
Copy link
Collaborator Author

systay commented Mar 26, 2024

Do we need to back port this to stay consistent?

I don't think that is important

@systay systay merged commit 6976baa into vitessio:main Mar 26, 2024
109 of 114 checks passed
@systay systay deleted the offset-type branch March 26, 2024 14:54
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