-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.6k
Address precision issue in IndexDiskUsageAnalyzerTests#testCompletionFields #125849
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
Merged
javanna
merged 1 commit into
elastic:main
from
javanna:test/index_disk_usage_completion
Mar 31, 2025
Merged
Address precision issue in IndexDiskUsageAnalyzerTests#testCompletionFields #125849
javanna
merged 1 commit into
elastic:main
from
javanna:test/index_disk_usage_completion
Mar 31, 2025
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…Fields We have some tolerance wound how many bytes we report for these completion fields. But the values depend on the distribution of the random values that determine how many docs get an option field. This commit makes the test more precise by computing the real ratio between docs that have the optional field and the total number of docs, so that we can base assertion on more realistic expectations. Closes elastic#123269
|
Pinging @elastic/es-search-foundations (Team:Search Foundations) |
drempapis
reviewed
Mar 31, 2025
.../test/java/org/elasticsearch/action/admin/indices/diskusage/IndexDiskUsageAnalyzerTests.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
drempapis
approved these changes
Mar 31, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
|
Thanks @drempapis ! |
💔 Backport failed
You can use sqren/backport to manually backport by running |
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 31, 2025
…Fields (#125849) (#125951) We have some tolerance wound how many bytes we report for these completion fields. But the values depend on the distribution of the random values that determine how many docs get an option field. This commit makes the test more precise by computing the real ratio between docs that have the optional field and the total number of docs, so that we can base assertion on more realistic expectations. Closes #123269
javanna
added a commit
to javanna/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 31, 2025
…Fields (elastic#125849) (elastic#125951) We have some tolerance wound how many bytes we report for these completion fields. But the values depend on the distribution of the random values that determine how many docs get an option field. This commit makes the test more precise by computing the real ratio between docs that have the optional field and the total number of docs, so that we can base assertion on more realistic expectations. Closes elastic#123269
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 31, 2025
…Fields (#125849) (#125951) (#125963) We have some tolerance wound how many bytes we report for these completion fields. But the values depend on the distribution of the random values that determine how many docs get an option field. This commit makes the test more precise by computing the real ratio between docs that have the optional field and the total number of docs, so that we can base assertion on more realistic expectations. Closes #123269
javanna
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2025
…Fields (#125849) (#125951) (#125962) We have some tolerance wound how many bytes we report for these completion fields. But the values depend on the distribution of the random values that determine how many docs get an option field. This commit makes the test more precise by computing the real ratio between docs that have the optional field and the total number of docs, so that we can base assertion on more realistic expectations. Closes #123269
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
auto-backport
Automatically create backport pull requests when merged
:Search Foundations/Search
Catch all for Search Foundations
Team:Search Foundations
Meta label for the Search Foundations team in Elasticsearch
>test
Issues or PRs that are addressing/adding tests
v8.18.1
v8.19.0
v9.0.0
v9.1.0
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We have some tolerance wound how many bytes we report for these completion fields. But the values depend on the distribution of the random values that determine how many docs get an option field. This commit makes the test more precise by computing the real ratio between docs that have the optional field and the total number of docs, so that we can base assertion on more realistic expectations.
This is a pretty rare failure that happened so far only in main, but it reproduces in 8.x as well, hence I suggest we backport the fix.
Closes #123269