Yes. Something on those lines. Also the last few PRs don't have the report
from codecov bot. codecov is not recognizing these commits as not "CI
passed" for some reason.
[image: image.png]
Working with the codecov community
<https://community.codecov.io/t/pr-reporting-very-low-coverage-and-hence-a-huge-decrease-in-coverage/1098/5?u=ramachandranms>
figure this out.

-Ram

On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 11:38 AM Vinoth Chandar <[email protected]> wrote:

> Essentially you are seeing that the new ones are okay. But the old ones are
> not okay even with rebasing
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 11:39 AM Ramachandran Madras Subramaniam
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > There are multiple scenarios with the ongoing situation.This is my
> > observation so far.
> >
> > *old PR = PR raised before coverage change merged into master*
> > *new PR = PR raised after coverage change merged into master*
> >
> > 1. old PR + diff without coverage changes (not rebased) - No coverage
> > reports (no comment from codecov bot)
> > 2. old PR + diff with coverage changes (rebased to master) - No coverage
> > for PR and hence negative 67% reported
> > 3. new PR - coverage properly reported
> >
> > So my intuition is that all PRs should have proper reports once all old
> PRs
> > are flushed out.
> >
> > -Ram
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 10:59 AM Vinoth Chandar <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Please keep an eye on this. and let us know when you see things
> reliably
> > > working..
> > >
> > > >> I am still seeing some PRs reporting zero coverage for the forked
> > branch
> > > and hence a drop of 60%+ coverage
> > >
> > > Do you see this for new PRs as well i.e ones opened this week?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 10:57 AM Ramachandran Madras Subramaniam
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thank you all for your kind words :)
> > > >
> > > > An update on the issues. I am still seeing some PRs reporting zero
> > > coverage
> > > > for the forked branch and hence a drop of 60%+ coverage. Opened a
> > ticket
> > > > with codecov
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.codecov.io_t_pr-2Dreporting-2Dvery-2Dlow-2Dcoverage-2Dand-2Dhence-2Da-2Dhuge-2Ddecrease-2Din-2Dcoverage_1098&d=DwIFaQ&c=r2dcLCtU9q6n0vrtnDw9vg&r=KLmNyF_KPBPNb-BIVUsy8j_1tYfqyNa57jwVia1c9kM&m=fNhdruIwvzpmZdQiE26lhWZCR34WWsmp93NzGnooJwI&s=6vtdSTTP7c_LqhCB5drQGg1Cq-B7k-YF5S-u9m5a1Yg&e=
> > > > >
> > > > today to understand this issue better.
> > > >
> > > > Also you might see some of the PRs not pulling up any coverage for
> > > master.
> > > > This is due to the fact that those PRs have not rebased to current
> > master
> > > > and have opened the diff against an older commit in master which
> > doesn't
> > > > have any data in codecov. This should go away if these PRs are
> rebased.
> > > It
> > > > is not mandatory to rebase as of now as this problem will fade away
> > > > eventually on new PRs.
> > > >
> > > > -Ram
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 8:20 PM Bhavani Sudha <
> [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This is super useful. Thanks Ramachandran!
> > > > >
> > > > > -Sudha
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 7:42 PM leesf <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Great job, thanks for your work.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sivabalan <[email protected]> 于2020年2月29日周六 下午12:02写道:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Good job! thanks for adding.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 5:41 PM vino yang <
> [email protected]
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >  Hi Ram,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks for your great work to make the code coverage clear.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > Vino
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Vinoth Chandar <[email protected]> 于2020年2月29日周六 上午4:39写道:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks Ram! This will definitely help improve the code
> > quality
> > > > over
> > > > > > > time!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 9:45 AM Ramachandran Madras
> > Subramaniam
> > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Diff 1347 <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_incubator-2Dhudi_pull_1347&d=DwIFaQ&c=r2dcLCtU9q6n0vrtnDw9vg&r=KLmNyF_KPBPNb-BIVUsy8j_1tYfqyNa57jwVia1c9kM&m=SS0RbqE858fB7dZFTDERnraMoIystkopIUY-jADgVHs&s=LWGjgAlb8k98t_HYrdUbYZ-rjQhDfVPRUYzXafRsJNA&e=
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > merged
> > > > > > > > > > into master yesterday. This enables visibility into code
> > > > coverage
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > hudi
> > > > > > > > > > in general and also provides insights into differential
> > > > coverage
> > > > > > > during
> > > > > > > > > > peer reviews.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Since this is very recent and is getting integrated, you
> > > might
> > > > > see
> > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > > > partial results in your diff. There can be 2 scenarios
> > here,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 1. Your diff is not rebased with latest master and hence
> > the
> > > > code
> > > > > > > > > coverage
> > > > > > > > > > report was not generated. To solve this issue, you just
> > have
> > > to
> > > > > > > rebase
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > latest master.
> > > > > > > > > > 2. Code coverage ran but reported as zero. Three was one
> > diff
> > > > > > (#1350)
> > > > > > > > > where
> > > > > > > > > > we saw this issue yesterday. This in general shouldn't
> > > happen.
> > > > > > Could
> > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > been due to an outage in codecov website. I will be
> > > monitoring
> > > > > > > upcoming
> > > > > > > > > > diffs for the near future to see if this problem
> persists.
> > > > Please
> > > > > > > ping
> > > > > > > > me
> > > > > > > > > > in the diff if you have any questions/concerns regarding
> > code
> > > > > > > coverage.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > Ram
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > -Sivabalan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to