Conversation
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
📝 Acceptance Test Report📋 Summary❌ The rule acceptance test has failed for commit 362fbe2 📊 Notices ComparisonNew Errors (0 out of 987 datasets, ~0%) ✅No changes were detected due to the code change. Dropped Errors (0 out of 987 datasets, ~0%) ✅No changes were detected due to the code change. New Warnings (13 out of 987 datasets, ~1%) ❌Details of new errors due to code change, which is above the provided threshold of 1%.
Dropped Warnings (0 out of 987 datasets, ~0%) ✅No changes were detected due to the code change. 🛡️ Corruption Check16 out of 1003 sources (~2 %) are corrupted.
⏱️ Performance Assessment📈 Validation TimeAssess the performance in terms of seconds taken for the validation process.
📜 Memory Consumption
|
📝 Acceptance Test Report📋 Summary❌ The rule acceptance test has failed for commit f59aa07 📊 Notices ComparisonNew Errors (0 out of 987 datasets, ~0%) ✅No changes were detected due to the code change. Dropped Errors (0 out of 987 datasets, ~0%) ✅No changes were detected due to the code change. New Warnings (13 out of 987 datasets, ~1%) ❌Details of new errors due to code change, which is above the provided threshold of 1%.
Dropped Warnings (0 out of 987 datasets, ~0%) ✅No changes were detected due to the code change. 🛡️ Corruption Check16 out of 1003 sources (~2 %) are corrupted.
⏱️ Performance Assessment📈 Validation TimeAssess the performance in terms of seconds taken for the validation process.
📜 Memory Consumption
|
| this.tripTable = tripTable; | ||
| this.routeTable = routeTable; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There should be a shouldCallValidate method for more efficiency. For example if there is no block_id column in trips.txt (it is optional), there is no point to call validate
Although it's true in that case that the call to byBlockIdMap should return probably an empty map which exits the loop pretty fast.
| this.transferTable = transferTable; | ||
| this.routeTable = routeTable; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding a shouldCallValidate method for more efficiency.
For example transfer.txt could have no from_route_id or to_route_id (they are optional). In that case there's no point to call validate.
jcpitre
left a comment
jcpitre
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am approving so you can decide if the changes I mentioned are worth it. Their effect is minor.
📝 Acceptance Test Report📋 Summary❌ The rule acceptance test has failed for commit 7172c85 📊 Notices ComparisonNew Errors (0 out of 987 datasets, ~0%) ✅No changes were detected due to the code change. Dropped Errors (0 out of 987 datasets, ~0%) ✅No changes were detected due to the code change. New Warnings (13 out of 987 datasets, ~1%) ❌Details of new errors due to code change, which is above the provided threshold of 1%.
Dropped Warnings (0 out of 987 datasets, ~0%) ✅No changes were detected due to the code change. 🛡️ Corruption Check16 out of 1003 sources (~2 %) are corrupted.
⏱️ Performance Assessment📈 Validation TimeAssess the performance in terms of seconds taken for the validation process.
📜 Memory Consumption
|
3 participants
Summary:
This pull request introduces two new GTFS validation rules to ensure consistency of route types for block IDs and in-seat transfers, along with corresponding tests and a minor schema annotation update.
New validation rules:
InconsistentRouteTypeForBlockIdValidator, which checks that all trips sharing ablock_idalso share the sameroute_type. If not, a warning notice is generated.InconsistentRouteTypeForInSeatTransferValidator, which ensures that an in-seat transfer (transfer type 5) only occurs between routes of the sameroute_type.Schema and test updates:
transferType()field inGtfsTransferSchemawith@Indexto improve lookup performance for transfer type-based validations.n
Expected behavior:
Please make sure these boxes are checked before submitting your pull request - thanks!
gradle testto make sure you didn't break anything