Closed dirtysalt closed 4 days ago
Failed conditions
C Reliability Rating on New Code (required ≥ A)
See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud
Catch issues before they fail your Quality Gate with our IDE extension SonarQube for IDE
:white_check_mark: pass : 0 / 0 (0%)
:white_check_mark: pass : 88 / 104 (84.62%)
path | covered_line | new_line | coverage | not_covered_line_detail | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
:large_blue_circle: | com/starrocks/connector/iceberg/CachingIcebergCatalog.java | 18 | 25 | 72.00% | [94, 203, 204, 261, 262, 386, 387] |
:large_blue_circle: | com/starrocks/connector/iceberg/IcebergCatalog.java | 60 | 69 | 86.96% | [183, 184, 194, 195, 234, 235, 243, 244, 251] |
:large_blue_circle: | com/starrocks/connector/iceberg/IcebergMetadata.java | 10 | 10 | 100.00% | [] |
:white_check_mark: pass : 0 / 0 (0%)
@mergify backport branch-3.4
backport branch-3.4
Why I'm doing:
For all iceberg catalog implementations, the way to
getPartitions
are the same:And with one pass scan, we can get both
What I'm doing:
Fixes #issue
What type of PR is this:
Does this PR entail a change in behavior?
If yes, please specify the type of change:
Checklist:
Bugfix cherry-pick branch check: