Closed 2010YOUY01 closed 2 weeks ago
:exclamation: No coverage uploaded for pull request base (
main@10b0eff
). Click here to learn what that means. The diff coverage isn/a
.:exclamation: Current head cdd5f24 differs from pull request most recent head ae31a7b. Consider uploading reports for the commit ae31a7b to get more accurate results
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #6067 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage ? 77.56%
=======================================
Files ? 419
Lines ? 96984
Branches ? 0
=======================================
Hits ? 75228
Misses ? 21756
Partials ? 0
:mega: We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more
Just in my opinion, I don't feel the need to add codedev for Datafusion for now.
Just in my opinion, I don't feel the need to add codedev for Datafusion for now.
I followed tarpaulin
repo's issues to get this fixed. This tool seems not very stable, people encounter different problems, and even the author can't tell why exactly.
So another issue is if it is got fixed now and it's still likely to break in the future and cause CI problems again :(
Maybe we should leave it commented and If people want to see coverage they can run it themself.
The coverage report from this PR is here https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/6067 but contains no information on what was not covered (so like what do we get from this site other than a webpage with a number).
When I look at the coverage report from arrow2, it seems to be quite useful (and have sources, etc): https://app.codecov.io/gh/jorgecarleitao/arrow2?search=&displayType=tree
Maybe we can follow the model there https://github.com/jorgecarleitao/arrow2/blob/main/.github/workflows/coverage.yml 🤔
Detailed information is normally displayed when switching to commit instead of pull requests. https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/arrow-datafusion/tree/enable-codecov I guess for PRs' reports, Codecov requires the latest commit of the main branch to already have a code coverage report in order to use it as a base for comparison. That might be the reason for not showing a detailed report in the first PR.🤔 And thank you for the pointer! I will check if the tool they used to generate Codecov reports is more stable than the current one.
That might be the reason for not showing a detailed report in the first PR.🤔
It is possible.
However, if you look at codecov reports from sqlparser (which I think is configured the same as this), such as the one on https://github.com/sqlparser-rs/sqlparser-rs/pull/817 https://coveralls.io/builds/57556726
it has the same lack of source issue
Thank you for your contribution. Unfortunately, this pull request is stale because it has been open 60 days with no activity. Please remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 7 days.
Which issue does this PR close?
Issue https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/issues/3678 Prev PR that disabled codecov: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/3679
Rationale for this change
cargo tarpaulin
will consume lots of disk space, previously it failed due to this reason. I tried removing several large files on GitHub Action virtual machines, then It can run again. Problem: after that, two dataframe tests failed, they're disabled temporarily. (cargo tarpaulin
will run tests to collect coverage stats, these tests will only fail undercargo tarpaulin
, normal test runs are not affected) https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/blob/10b0eff7dfbe195a724285bc166b20240e8ebccb/datafusion/core/src/dataframe.rs#L1978 https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/blob/10b0eff7dfbe195a724285bc166b20240e8ebccb/datafusion/core/src/dataframe.rs#L2070 These two test cases are added after last time codecov CI is disabled, I don't know why they might fail undercargo tarpaulin
Failure messages:Failing CI run : https://github.com/2010YOUY01/arrow-datafusion/actions/runs/4750006102 Can be reproduced with CI config in this commit https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/commit/75c7fb77094d7e4ce907db343b77f268f075356f
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?