[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2863?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17711599#comment-17711599
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on TINKERPOP-2863:
-------------------------------------------
codecov-commenter commented on PR #2020:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/2020#issuecomment-1506078740
##
[Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/tinkerpop/pull/2020?src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=The+Apache+Software+Foundation)
Report
> Merging
[#2020](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/tinkerpop/pull/2020?src=pr&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=The+Apache+Software+Foundation)
(9dd83a1) into
[3.6-dev](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/tinkerpop/commit/3249e5856fee577cae9a2f69260cbc6c6c1ffd66?el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=The+Apache+Software+Foundation)
(3249e58) will **decrease** coverage by `4.91%`.
> The diff coverage is `n/a`.
> :exclamation: Current head 9dd83a1 differs from pull request most recent
head bd8253e. Consider uploading reports for the commit bd8253e to get more
accurate results
```diff
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## 3.6-dev #2020 +/- ##
=============================================
- Coverage 69.41% 64.51% -4.91%
=============================================
Files 878 25 -853
Lines 42083 3793 -38290
Branches 5640 0 -5640
=============================================
- Hits 29212 2447 -26765
+ Misses 10877 1179 -9698
+ Partials 1994 167 -1827
```
[see 853 files with indirect coverage
changes](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/tinkerpop/pull/2020/indirect-changes?src=pr&el=tree-more&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=The+Apache+Software+Foundation)
:mega: We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD
build times. [Learn
more](https://about.codecov.io/iterative-testing/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=The+Apache+Software+Foundation)
> HasId Step generates incorrect results when given a list of IDs mid-traversal
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-2863
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2863
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: process
> Affects Versions: 3.6.2
> Reporter: Taylor Riggan
> Priority: Critical
>
> In most situations, hasId() will accept a list of potential IDs to filter on
> and implicitly use within() filtering semantics to return the correct
> results. Examples:
> {code:java}
> g.V().hasId(['1','2'])
> {code}
> returns:
> {code:java}
> [v[1], v[2]]{code}
> or
> {code:java}
> g.E().hasId(['5140','5261']){code}
> returns:
> {code:java}
> [e[5140][1-route->51], e[5261][1-route->398]]{code}
> However, when using the same form of semantics mid-traversal, both of these
> queries return empty results:
> {code:java}
> g.V().has('code','ATL').outE('route').hasId(['5140','5261'])
> g.V().has('code','ATL').outE('route').inV().hasId(['2','3'])
> {code}
> When using profile() against both queries, the hasId() bytecode gets
> transformed into
> {code:java}
> HasStep([~id.eq([5140, 5261])]) {code}
> This equates to finding a vertex or edge with an ID that matches the entire
> list instead of the elements within the list.
> The preceding was tested against Gremlin Server 3.6.2 with the Airroutes
> dataset.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
