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

feat(connector): add nats integration test #12471

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Dec 19, 2023
Merged

feat(connector): add nats integration test #12471

merged 7 commits into from
Dec 19, 2023

Conversation

yufansong
Copy link
Member

I hereby agree to the terms of the RisingWave Labs, Inc. Contributor License Agreement.

Add integration test for nats source/sink.

Checklist

  • I have written necessary rustdoc comments
  • I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests
  • I have added fuzzing tests or opened an issue to track them. (Optional, recommended for new SQL features Sqlsmith: Sql feature generation #7934).
  • My PR contains breaking changes. (If it deprecates some features, please create a tracking issue to remove them in the future).
  • All checks passed in ./risedev check (or alias, ./risedev c)
  • My PR changes performance-critical code. (Please run macro/micro-benchmarks and show the results.)
  • My PR contains critical fixes that are necessary to be merged into the latest release. (Please check out the details)

Documentation

  • My PR needs documentation updates. (Please use the Release note section below to summarize the impact on users)

Release note

If this PR includes changes that directly affect users or other significant modifications relevant to the community, kindly draft a release note to provide a concise summary of these changes. Please prioritize highlighting the impact these changes will have on users.

@StrikeW
Copy link
Contributor

StrikeW commented Sep 21, 2023

You may need to add query.sql and data_check files, please refer to the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh for the steps of integration test.

@StrikeW
Copy link
Contributor

StrikeW commented Nov 13, 2023

Hi @yufansong, do you plan to go on this work?

@yufansong
Copy link
Member Author

Hi @yufansong, do you plan to go on this work?

Oh, almost forget this one. I can continue this one in next week. Currently busy with some more urgent task. Thanks for remind. @StrikeW

@yufansong
Copy link
Member Author

Continue to work on this PR this week.

@yufansong
Copy link
Member Author

yufansong commented Dec 13, 2023

You may need to add query.sql and data_check files, please refer to the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh for the steps of integration test.

@StrikeW I have checked the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh logic. It can run correctly in run_demo.py, check_data.py and clean_demos.py. Is there anything I need to test?

But I didn't directly run the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh locally because of some env parameter configuration. Is there any way to run it directly?

@StrikeW
Copy link
Contributor

StrikeW commented Dec 14, 2023

You may need to add query.sql and data_check files, please refer to the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh for the steps of integration test.

@StrikeW I have checked the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh logic. It can run correctly in run_demo.py, check_data.py and clean_demos.py. Is there anything I need to test?

But I didn't directly run the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh locally because of some env parameter configuration. Is there any way to run it directly?

You can build a docker image against your branch then trigger the integration test pipeline manually from buildkite and specify your image via the RW_IMAGE parameter.

@yufansong
Copy link
Member Author

You may need to add query.sql and data_check files, please refer to the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh for the steps of integration test.

@StrikeW I have checked the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh logic. It can run correctly in run_demo.py, check_data.py and clean_demos.py. Is there anything I need to test?
But I didn't directly run the ci/scripts/integration-tests.sh locally because of some env parameter configuration. Is there any way to run it directly?

You can build a docker image against your branch then trigger the integration test pipeline manually from buildkite and specify your image via the RW_IMAGE parameter.

Yeah, I test it in buildkite intergration-test workflow and the result is correct.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 16, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (7006fca) 68.06% compared to head (3e060a4) 68.07%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #12471   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   68.06%   68.07%           
=======================================
  Files        1548     1548           
  Lines      267474   267474           
=======================================
+ Hits       182052   182075   +23     
+ Misses      85422    85399   -23     
Flag Coverage Δ
rust 68.07% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

Copy link
Contributor

@tabVersion tabVersion left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

basically LGTM, are there related tests in CI?

@yufansong
Copy link
Member Author

yufansong commented Dec 19, 2023

basically LGTM, are there related tests in CI?

@tabVersion I manually trigger the test here

@yufansong yufansong enabled auto-merge December 19, 2023 06:26
@yufansong yufansong added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 19, 2023
Merged via the queue into main with commit 794ae4e Dec 19, 2023
26 of 27 checks passed
@yufansong yufansong deleted the yufan/nats-test branch December 19, 2023 06:52
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