andygrove opened a new pull request, #3256:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion-comet/pull/3256

   ## Summary
   
   CI runs the test suite multiple times with different scan implementations 
set as the default (`native_comet`, `native_datafusion`, 
`native_iceberg_compat`). However, some tests were hard-coded to explicitly set 
`native_comet` as the scan implementation, which meant those tests were not 
exercising the other scan implementations even when CI was configured to test 
them.
   
   This change removes explicit `native_comet` settings from tests that don't 
specifically require it, allowing them to use whichever scan implementation is 
configured as the default. This increases test coverage for `native_datafusion` 
and `native_iceberg_compat` scan implementations.
   
   **Ensuring these scan implementations pass all tests is an important step 
before we can consider deprecating `native_comet`.**
   
   ## Changes
   
   - **CometFuzzTestBase**: Use default scan impl instead of iterating over all 
impls (CI provides coverage by running with different defaults)
   - **ParquetReadSuite**: Remove explicit `native_comet` from 4 tests and V2 
suite
   - **ParquetDatetimeRebaseSuite**: Remove explicit `native_comet` from 3 
tests and V2 suite  
   - **CometExpressionSuite**: Remove explicit `native_comet` from 3 tests
   
   ## Test plan
   
   - [ ] CI passes with all scan implementations configured as default
   - [ ] Verify increased test coverage for `native_datafusion` and 
`native_iceberg_compat`
   
   🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to