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

[draft][v1] Re-enable some randomized tests #1696

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

alancai98
Copy link
Member

Relevant Issues

Description

  • Re-enables some randomized tests

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 6, 2025

CROSS-ENGINE-REPORT ❌

BASE (LEGACY-V0.14.8) TARGET (EVAL-FC89DB0) +/-
% Passing 89.67% 94.56% 4.88% ✅
Passing 5287 5575 288 ✅
Failing 609 47 -562 ✅
Ignored 0 274 274 🔶
Total Tests 5896 5896 0 ✅

Testing Details

  • Base Commit: v0.14.8
  • Base Engine: LEGACY
  • Target Commit: fc89db0
  • Target Engine: EVAL

Result Details

  • ❌ REGRESSION DETECTED. See Now Failing/Ignored Tests. ❌
  • Passing in both: 2644
  • Failing in both: 17
  • Ignored in both: 0
  • PASSING in BASE but now FAILING in TARGET: 2
  • PASSING in BASE but now IGNORED in TARGET: 108
  • FAILING in BASE but now PASSING in TARGET: 180
  • IGNORED in BASE but now PASSING in TARGET: 0

Now FAILING Tests ❌

The following 2 test(s) were previously PASSING in BASE but are now FAILING in TARGET:

Click here to see
  1. inPredicateWithTableConstructor, compileOption: PERMISSIVE
  2. notInPredicateWithTableConstructor, compileOption: PERMISSIVE

Now IGNORED Tests ❌

The complete list can be found in GitHub CI summary, either from Step Summary or in the Artifact.

Now Passing Tests

180 test(s) were previously failing in BASE (LEGACY-V0.14.8) but now pass in TARGET (EVAL-FC89DB0). Before merging, confirm they are intended to pass.

The complete list can be found in GitHub CI summary, either from Step Summary or in the Artifact.

CROSS-COMMIT-REPORT ✅

BASE (EVAL-71E9EE3) TARGET (EVAL-FC89DB0) +/-
% Passing 94.56% 94.56% 0.00% ✅
Passing 5575 5575 0 ✅
Failing 47 47 0 ✅
Ignored 274 274 0 ✅
Total Tests 5896 5896 0 ✅

Testing Details

  • Base Commit: 71e9ee3
  • Base Engine: EVAL
  • Target Commit: fc89db0
  • Target Engine: EVAL

Result Details

  • Passing in both: 5575
  • Failing in both: 47
  • Ignored in both: 274
  • PASSING in BASE but now FAILING in TARGET: 0
  • PASSING in BASE but now IGNORED in TARGET: 0
  • FAILING in BASE but now PASSING in TARGET: 0
  • IGNORED in BASE but now PASSING in TARGET: 0

@@ -1,121 +0,0 @@
// package org.partiql.lang.randomized.eval.builtins
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(self-review) TimestampTemporalAccessor class was deleted in v1 branch so tests no longer relevant

@@ -53,7 +52,6 @@ class PartiQLParserDateTimeRandomizedTests {
}

@Test
@Disabled("The planner does not return the v1 plans right now. See assertExpression.") // TODO
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(self-review) these tests passed when re-enabled.

There is another file that has some datetime evaluation tests -- https://github.com/partiql/partiql-lang-kotlin/blob/enable-some-randomized-tests/test/partiql-randomized-tests/src/test/kotlin/org/partiql/lang/randomized/eval/EvaluatingCompilerDateTimeRandomizedTests.kt. Those tests depend on the old datetime modeling. Once that modeling is updated in #1691, we can try re-enabling those tests.

Comment on lines +28 to +31
* TODO int overflow behavior is confusing. Should we
* - Overflow (no error)
* - Upcast to long (no error)
* - Error
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(self-review) cut an issue to track -- #1697.

Will discuss w/ team on whether the evaluation behavior needs changed. If so, how to update the randomized tests.

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.

1 participant