Agabi10 added a comment.
@Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE It's still triggering the error for the author property of Q6012487 and probably many others. I suppose it's the same problem, so I don't know if it would be more appropriate reopening this bug or creating a new one.TASK
gerritbot added a comment.
Change 358055 merged by jenkins-bot:
[mediawiki/extensions/WikibaseQualityConstraints@master] Inject use SparqlHelper in TypeCheckerHelper
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/358055TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T166379EMAIL
Agabi10 added a comment.
OK @Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, so if that's intended I think it works as expected. Thanks.TASK DETAILhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T166379EMAIL PREFERENCEShttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/To: Agabi10Cc: gerritbot, Lydia_Pintscher, Jonas,
gerritbot added a comment.
Change 358055 had a related patch set uploaded (by Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE); owner: Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE)):
[mediawiki/extensions/WikibaseQualityConstraints@master] Inject use SparqlHelper in TypeCheckerHelper
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/358055TASK
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE added a comment.
@Agabi10 I think that’s working as intended – “instance of” and “subclass of” are different things and, in general, shouldn’t be used interchangeably. If some people think that “instance of” should be used and add a constraint to reflect that, and other
Agabi10 added a comment.
@Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE I think it is working now, but I think there may be a problem still in how the value type constraint is checked (or with my understanding of what a type is). It still displays an error when the entity instead of being an instance of a given entity
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE added a comment.
I think the new limit has been deployed (I see type checking spikes of 4 s and 7½ s in the last 12 h on Grafana), can you try it out? (Perhaps unswap the classes if you don’t have any other item where the test previously failed?)
@abian that would be
abian added a comment.
In T166379#3299880, @Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE wrote:
We replaced the depth limit with a limit on total entities visited a few weeks ago (0408a71186e3); the ticket for it, T164948, isn’t public yet, but the test commit 6f24ded76ea4 has a longer explanation for the issue.
We
