[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2088?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16322790#comment-16322790
]
Julian Hyde commented on CALCITE-2088:
--------------------------------------
Re 1. There have been discussions over the years about coding style. I think
some people have offered their IDE configs; you may be able to find them if you
search. Some policy is enforced by checkstyle. The rest is up to you - make
sure the code you write looks like the code that's already there, and do a 'git
diff' before you submit.
Re patching the pull request. The easiest thing for the reviewer is if you just
add a new commit to the same branch. You don't need a new PR or JIRA case, but
it's helpful if you add a comment in JIRA to say there's something new to
review.
Also, please take a look at my branch that uses an external chinook data set,
https://github.com/julianhyde/calcite/tree/2088-chinook. It doesn't fully work
(and you will need to do a local {{mvn install}} of
net.hydromatic:chinook-data-hsqldb) but it's a good start.
> More complex end2end tests in Calcite Plus module
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-2088
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2088
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 1.16.0
> Reporter: Piotr Bojko
> Assignee: Piotr Bojko
>
> As in following correspondence - we would like to have more tests with more
> complexity. This should lead to lower regressions.
> {quote}
> Yes, please do.
> On Dec 8, 2017, at 7:13 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>
> I've taken a look into quidem.
>
> I will log jira for that and assign it to myself, ok?
>
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017, 22:26 Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> More tests are always welcome.
>
> I would be wary of adding a new approach (assertj-db). Over time we end up
> with as many approaches as there are contributors, and so the code becomes
> hard to maintain. Consider using quidem (see QuidemTest and various .iq
> files in the code base); it combines assertion-based testing with the
> simplicity of script-based tests.
>
> This could be added to the “plus” module, where we don’t mind extra
> dependencies, and don’t mind if the test suite takes a long time.
>
> Julian
>
>
> On Dec 2, 2017, at 3:40 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
> Hello fellow calcite dev team,
>
> I am building a database with use of calcite framework and decided that
> instead of simple unit tests I will go only with integration tests. This
> is
> due the fact that my code only glues the calcite with data and configures
> the whole thing decorating with web api and jdbc access (with avatica ;)
> ).
>
> I have some problems with calcite, possible bugs - some of them in apache
> jira for calcite logged already. Those problem are visible through my
> tests.
>
> And with that in mind I have an idea for a new maven artifact for
> calcite -
> end to end tests for an example h2 database. Database could have some
> tables with data - maybe 100k rows in all tables. Tests with assertj and
> its derivatives, something like I've done in my project - see the
> pastebin
> https://pastebin.com/raw/mevih4k6 .
>
> Such test set can help with lowering regressions establishing a common
> ground for talking about the calcite behaviour on specific cases (which
> can
> be described through end2end tests).
>
> The tech under such maven artifact can be pretty simple:
>
> - h2 as a data source, maybe some other
> - one properly complicated json calcite schema
> - some tech for populating h2 with data (just for having data with some
> descriptive language, not a binary format)
> - assertj-db for DSL in tests
>
> What do You think?
>
> Cheers,
> Pete
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
