Skip to content

Conversation

@pvk-developer
Copy link
Member

Resolves #486
CU-86b7cjbz8

@sdv-team
Copy link
Contributor

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 24, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 99.12281% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 77.98%. Comparing base (cf085f5) to head (3aa5202).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on feature_branch/mutli_table_benchmark.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
sdgym/metrics.py 66.66% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@                           Coverage Diff                            @@
##           feature_branch/mutli_table_benchmark     #504      +/-   ##
========================================================================
+ Coverage                                 77.04%   77.98%   +0.93%     
========================================================================
  Files                                        30       30              
  Lines                                      2496     2557      +61     
========================================================================
+ Hits                                       1923     1994      +71     
+ Misses                                      573      563      -10     
Flag Coverage Δ
integration 64.25% <93.85%> (+1.12%) ⬆️
unit 71.99% <92.10%> (+1.28%) ⬆️

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.

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

@pvk-developer pvk-developer force-pushed the issue-486-add-benchmark_multi_table_function branch from df5e11c to c51dc98 Compare November 26, 2025 17:10
@pvk-developer pvk-developer changed the base branch from main to feature_branch/mutli_table_benchmark November 26, 2025 17:11
@pvk-developer pvk-developer changed the title WIP: Add working multi table benchmark Add working multi table benchmark Nov 26, 2025
@pvk-developer pvk-developer marked this pull request as ready for review November 26, 2025 17:52
@pvk-developer pvk-developer requested a review from a team as a code owner November 26, 2025 17:52
Copy link
Contributor

@amontanez24 amontanez24 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looking great!

Comment on lines 1250 to 1393
empty_scores = pd.DataFrame()
mock__generate_job_args_list.return_value = []
mock__get_empty_dataframe.return_value = empty_scores
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if you are passing in no synthesizers or datasets, why do you also need to mock the jobs returned? Shouldn't that list be empty?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@pvk-developer any word on this?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done here: 7dd15e7

The initial idea was to test that functions are properly called but those were already tested anyways in the previous tests so I removed the mocks that were not really needed.

Copy link
Contributor

@R-Palazzo R-Palazzo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good!

After addressing @amontanez24's comments, we should be good to go :)

@R-Palazzo R-Palazzo force-pushed the feature_branch/mutli_table_benchmark branch from f5abf35 to cf085f5 Compare November 28, 2025 15:16
@pvk-developer pvk-developer force-pushed the issue-486-add-benchmark_multi_table_function branch from 561b1cb to 15288cf Compare December 1, 2025 16:36
@pvk-developer pvk-developer self-assigned this Dec 1, 2025
@pvk-developer pvk-developer requested a review from fealho December 2, 2025 12:05
Copy link
Contributor

@R-Palazzo R-Palazzo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I like the _import_and_validate_synthesizers

@pvk-developer pvk-developer merged commit e14f7ff into feature_branch/mutli_table_benchmark Dec 3, 2025
55 of 56 checks passed
@pvk-developer pvk-developer deleted the issue-486-add-benchmark_multi_table_function branch December 3, 2025 08:32
R-Palazzo pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 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.

Add benchmark_multi_table function

6 participants