Akil, The optimizer tests only compare physical operator trees (where each node is a physical operator kind and its execution mode). If you're creating a new physical operator and this kind of comparison does not seem sufficient to you, then you could consider creating the job spec testsuite as I described.
I think that at the minimum you need to have runtime tests and optimizer tests for your new feature. Thanks, -- Dmitry On 5/10/21, 1:23 PM, "Akil Sevim" <[email protected]> wrote: Thanks a lot for the reply, Dmitry. So, as I understand you do not think it is unnecessary, and there can be cases such that the implementation passes the optimizer tests but still resulting incorrect hyracks jobs. On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 1:07 PM Dmitry Lychagin <[email protected]> wrote: > Akil, > > I think that we currently don't have a testsuite for testing Hyracks jobs. > You could implement it similar to JsonLogicalPlanTest [1] / OptimizerTest > [2]. > The client API already has a flag to request generated job. See [3]: > AsterixJavaClient.compile(..., boolean printJob) > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/asterixdb/blob/master/asterixdb/asterix-app/src/test/java/org/apache/asterix/test/jsonplan/JsonLogicalPlanTest.java > [2] > https://github.com/apache/asterixdb/blob/master/asterixdb/asterix-app/src/test/java/org/apache/asterix/test/optimizer/OptimizerTest.java > [3] > https://github.com/apache/asterixdb/blob/master/asterixdb/asterix-app/src/main/java/org/apache/asterix/api/java/AsterixJavaClient.java#L100 > > Thanks, > -- Dmitry > > > On 5/10/21, 12:51 PM, "Akil Sevim" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello All, > > Is there any way to implement a test to check hyracks jobs produced as > expected? For instance, we want to be sure about is having specific > operators run on multiple nodes i.e., have proper partitioning > constraints. > > Or, should testing the optimized logical plan be enough for any case > making > hyrakcs jobs testing unnecessary? > > Best regards, > > Akil. > >
