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

Expression test modify #3041

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Oct 13, 2021
Merged

Expression test modify #3041

merged 11 commits into from
Oct 13, 2021

Conversation

zhaohaifei
Copy link
Contributor

Background:
Since the original repos are separate, the nebula/src/common/expression/test module is written based on the original repo:nebula-common. The parser module in nebual-graph cannot be called directly. Now that the repos are merged, we want to directly call the parser module to do the test.

@zhaohaifei zhaohaifei added ready-for-testing PR: ready for the CI test cherry-pick-v2.6 PR: need cherry-pick to this version labels Oct 12, 2021
@Sophie-Xie Sophie-Xie added this to the v2.6.0 milestone Oct 12, 2021
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Oct 12, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #3041 (2b4a32c) into master (d8e5539) will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 92.43%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3041      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   84.20%   84.22%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1287     1287              
  Lines      115319   115625     +306     
==========================================
+ Hits        97100    97386     +286     
- Misses      18219    18239      +20     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/storage/StorageServer.cpp 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...torage/transaction/ChainAddEdgesProcessorLocal.cpp 58.95% <40.35%> (+3.28%) ⬆️
...mon/expression/test/FunctionCallExpressionTest.cpp 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...c/common/expression/test/LogicalExpressionTest.cpp 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ommon/expression/test/RelationalExpressionTest.cpp 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/common/expression/test/TestBase.h 100.00% <100.00%> (+14.15%) ⬆️
...eta/processors/session/SessionManagerProcessor.cpp 74.52% <0.00%> (-4.46%) ⬇️
src/graph/executor/StorageAccessExecutor.h 66.23% <0.00%> (-2.60%) ⬇️
src/graph/session/GraphSessionManager.cpp 79.53% <0.00%> (-1.76%) ⬇️
src/kvstore/raftex/Host.cpp 63.37% <0.00%> (-1.75%) ⬇️
... and 21 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update db2e6e9...2b4a32c. Read the comment docs.

@@ -60,7 +60,12 @@ TEST_F(FunctionCallExpressionTest, FunctionCallTest) {
path.src.vid = "1";
STEP("2", "edge", 0, 1);
STEP("1", "edge", 0, -1);
TEST_FUNCTION(hasSameEdgeInPath, {path}, true);
Copy link
Contributor

@Shylock-Hg Shylock-Hg Oct 13, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think you should provide some new test utilities instead of expand them.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why don't use TEST_FUNCTION?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

TEST_FUNCTION is a parser process, here cannot construct a sentence to call parser.

Copy link
Contributor

@Shylock-Hg Shylock-Hg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Lgtm.

Copy link
Contributor

@yixinglu yixinglu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Where to use the graph parser in the following tests? I don't think this changes improve these tests clearly.

@zhaohaifei
Copy link
Contributor Author

Where to use the graph parser in the following tests? I don't think this changes improve these tests clearly.

Not to improve, but to verify the correctness of the original expression。

@CPWstatic CPWstatic merged commit 63f5663 into vesoft-inc:master Oct 13, 2021
@zhaohaifei zhaohaifei deleted the expression_test_modify branch October 13, 2021 10:09
Sophie-Xie pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 15, 2021
* modify expression test

* modify expression test 2

* complete coding

* fix bug

* modify expression test case

* clang-format

* fix bug:initialization-order-fiasco

* add some obj

* add test_path_function

Co-authored-by: cpw <[email protected]>
yixinglu added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2021
* Expression test modify (#3041)

* modify expression test

* modify expression test 2

* complete coding

* fix bug

* modify expression test case

* clang-format

* fix bug:initialization-order-fiasco

* add some obj

* add test_path_function

Co-authored-by: cpw <[email protected]>

* add hash<set> & hash<map> (#3051)

* fix  dangling edge in path (#3008)

* fix dangling edge

* add test case

* fix ci error

* Fix graph/meta/storage version in show hosts (#3054)

* Fix graph version bug

* Fix storage version

* Print cpack config

* Decrease ubuntu compile parallelism

* fix bug #3048 (#3069)

Co-authored-by: haifei.zhao <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: cpw <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: jimingquan <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Yee <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cherry-pick-v2.6 PR: need cherry-pick to this version ready-for-testing PR: ready for the CI test
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants