Add Flake models and refactor flake detection #346
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is ✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #346 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.64% 97.64%
=======================================
Files 393 393
Lines 32811 32874 +63
=======================================
+ Hits 32038 32100 +62
- Misses 773 774 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #346 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.64% 97.64%
=======================================
Files 393 393
Lines 32811 32874 +63
=======================================
+ Hits 32038 32100 +62
- Misses 773 774 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #346 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.64% 97.64%
=======================================
Files 393 393
Lines 32811 32874 +63
=======================================
+ Hits 32038 32100 +62
- Misses 773 774 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #346 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.65% 97.65%
=======================================
Files 424 424
Lines 33511 33574 +63
=======================================
+ Hits 32726 32788 +62
- Misses 785 786 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
This change has been scanned for critical changes. Learn more |
joseph-sentry
force-pushed
the
joseph/flake-models
branch
from
bc3fe9e
to
535c596
Compare
| @@ -77,6 +83,7 @@ def create_test_instance(dbsession, test_id, upload_id, outcome, failure_message | |||
| ) | |||
| dbsession.add(ti) | |||
| dbsession.flush() | |||
| return ti | |||
services/flake_detection.py
Outdated
| self.is_curr_flake = False | ||
| self.flake_dict.clear() | ||
| self.commit_to_outcome.clear() | ||
| @cached_property |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's remember that having a class-wide cached property is not a good idea cause the cache is shared among all instances of the class... I think that was the gotcha.
I do think that each of these classes should return a single FlakeSymtomType so this seems fine. Probably it's what you intended, but just stating it again
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That being said, I don't think we gain anything by having this cached.... in all your implementations it's just a constant being returned. Maybe I'd remove this cached_property, but nit in any case.
| FAILED_IN_DEFAULT_BRANCH = "failed_in_default_branch" | ||
| CONSECUTIVE_DIFF_OUTCOMES = "consecutive_diff_outcomes" | ||
| UNRELATED_MATCHING_FAILURES = "unrelated_matching_failures" | ||
| classes that implement this interface are expected to: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[very nit] I think this can be broken up into docstrings in the abstract methods directly... I feel that this could very easily become obsolete and people forget to update it.
Signed-off-by: joseph-sentry <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: joseph-sentry <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: joseph-sentry <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: joseph-sentry <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: joseph-sentry <[email protected]>
joseph-sentry
force-pushed
the
joseph/flake-models
branch
from
d8351ca
to
0132b4b
Compare
Refactors flake detection to use FlakeDetectionEngine and symptom detectors