test: fix GitHubIssue3878Test - materialized view empty due to uncommitted setup data

[robfrank]

Summary

• GitHubIssue3878Test used autoStartTx = true, causing beginTest() to run inside an uncommitted transaction
• MaterializedViewRefresher.fullRefresh() creates a dedicated transaction with joinCurrentTx=false that cannot see uncommitted data under snapshot isolation — so both materialized views were created empty
• Fix: remove autoStartTx, wrap INSERTs in database.transaction() so test data is committed before the view's initial fullRefresh runs (matching the pattern in MaterializedViewSQLTest)

Test plan

• All 4 tests in GitHubIssue3878Test now pass (Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[codacy-production]

Up to standards ✅

🟢 Issues 0 issues

Results:
0 new issues

View in Codacy

🟢 Coverage ∅ diff coverage · -7.51% coverage variation

Metric	Results
Coverage variation	✅ -7.51% coverage variation
Diff coverage	✅ ∅ diff coverage

View coverage diff in Codacy

Coverage variation details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Coverage
Common ancestor commit (582167a)	118917	86638	72.86%
Head commit (6545f07)	150156 (+31239)	98120 (+11482)	65.35% (-7.51%)

Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: <coverage of head commit> - <coverage of common ancestor commit>

Diff coverage details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Diff coverage
Pull request (#3954)	0	0	∅ (not applicable)

Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: <covered lines added or modified>/<coverable lines added or modified> * 100%

_{NEW Get contextual insights on your PRs based on Codacy's metrics, along with PR and Jira context, without leaving GitHub. Enable AI reviewer
TIP This summary will be updated as you push new changes. Give us feedback}

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request updates the GitHubIssue3878Test class by removing the automatic transaction start configuration and instead wrapping the document insertion commands within an explicit transaction block in the beginTest method. I have no feedback to provide as there were no review comments.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 64.45%. Comparing base (582167a) to head (6545f07).
⚠️ Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3954      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   64.00%   64.45%   +0.44%     
==========================================
  Files        1591     1591              
  Lines      118917   118917              
  Branches    25271    25271              
==========================================
+ Hits        76118    76652     +534     
+ Misses      32309    31681     -628     
- Partials    10490    10584      +94     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.