Skip to content

Conversation

David-Engel
Copy link
Collaborator

During review of #2705, I noticed a lot of old test objects in the logs. This PR updates a few tests that weren't cleaning up after themselves appropriately.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 8, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 51.62%. Comparing base (1dc9eb7) to head (dc22274).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #2734      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     51.62%   51.62%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity     4088     4082       -6     
============================================
  Files           149      149              
  Lines         34243    34242       -1     
  Branches       5719     5719              
============================================
- Hits          17679    17677       -2     
+ Misses        14103    14091      -12     
- Partials       2461     2474      +13     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ public void testISQLServerBulkRecord() throws SQLException {
@Test
public void testBulkCopyDateTimePrecision() throws SQLException {
String dstTable = TestUtils
.escapeSingleQuotes(AbstractSQLGenerator.escapeIdentifier(RandomUtil.getIdentifier("dstTable")));
.escapeSingleQuotes(AbstractSQLGenerator.escapeIdentifier(RandomUtil.getIdentifier("dstTableBulkCopyDt")));
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

None of the previous code here was leaving objects in the DB, but the generic name "dstTable" was used elsewhere, making it difficult to quickly identify the offending test.

TestUtils.dropTableIfExists(tableNameJSON, stmt);
TestUtils.dropProcedureIfExists(procedureNameJSON, stmt);
TestUtils.dropUserDefinedTypeIfExists(manyParamUserDefinedType, stmt);
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Tens of thousands of stray types were not getting cleaned up due to this ordering. The type was referenced by the sproc, so the type wouldn't get dropped.

Comment on lines +331 to +333
TestUtils.dropTypeIfExists(timestampTVP, stmt);
TestUtils.dropTypeIfExists(dateTVP, stmt);
TestUtils.dropTypeIfExists(timeTVP, stmt);
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Tens of thousands of stray types were not getting cleaned up here...

@machavan machavan added this to the 13.3.0 milestone Aug 26, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants