Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore: release 1.7.1-SNAPSHOT #719

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 10, 2020
Merged

Conversation

release-please[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

馃 I have created a release *beep* *boop*

Updating meta-information for bleeding-edge SNAPSHOT release.


This PR was generated with Release Please.

@release-please release-please bot requested a review from a team December 10, 2020 02:38
@release-please release-please bot requested a review from a team as a code owner December 10, 2020 02:38
@release-please release-please bot added the type: process A process-related concern. May include testing, release, or the like. label Dec 10, 2020
@generated-files-bot
Copy link

Warning: This pull request is touching the following templated files:

  • samples/snapshot/pom.xml

@product-auto-label product-auto-label bot added the api: bigquerystorage Issues related to the googleapis/java-bigquerystorage API. label Dec 10, 2020
@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement. label Dec 10, 2020
Copy link
Collaborator

@yoshi-approver yoshi-approver left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Rubber stamped release!

@yoshi-approver yoshi-approver added automerge Merge the pull request once unit tests and other checks pass. kokoro:force-run Add this label to force Kokoro to re-run the tests. labels Dec 10, 2020
@yoshi-kokoro yoshi-kokoro removed the kokoro:force-run Add this label to force Kokoro to re-run the tests. label Dec 10, 2020
@gcf-merge-on-green
Copy link

Merge-on-green attempted to merge your PR for 6 hours, but it was not mergeable because either one of your required status checks failed, one of your required reviews was not approved, or there is a do not merge label. Learn more about your required status checks here: https://help.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/enabling-required-status-checks. You can remove and reapply the label to re-run the bot.

@gcf-merge-on-green gcf-merge-on-green bot removed the automerge Merge the pull request once unit tests and other checks pass. label Dec 10, 2020
@stephaniewang526
Copy link
Contributor

@yirutang full stacktrace

java.lang.AssertionError
	at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:87)
	at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:42)
	at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:53)
	at com.google.cloud.bigquery.storage.v1alpha2.JsonStreamWriterTest.testMultiThreadAppendNoSchemaUpdate(JsonStreamWriterTest.java:808)
	at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
	at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
	at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
	at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
	at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:59)
	at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:12)
	at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:56)
	at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:17)
	at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
	at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306)
	at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner$1.evaluate(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:100)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:366)
	at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:103)
	at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:63)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$4.run(ParentRunner.java:331)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:79)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:329)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$100(ParentRunner.java:66)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:293)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:413)
	at org.junit.runners.Suite.runChild(Suite.java:128)
	at org.junit.runners.Suite.runChild(Suite.java:27)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$4.run(ParentRunner.java:331)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:79)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:329)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$100(ParentRunner.java:66)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:293)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:413)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCore.run(JUnitCore.java:55)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.createRequestAndRun(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:137)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.executeEager(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:107)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.execute(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:83)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreWrapper.execute(JUnitCoreWrapper.java:75)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junitcore.JUnitCoreProvider.invoke(JUnitCoreProvider.java:157)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:428)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.execute(ForkedBooter.java:162)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.run(ForkedBooter.java:562)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:548)

This test seems flaky - could you take a look please?

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 10, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #719 (61a2f04) into master (ace8a95) will increase coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master     #719      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     80.37%   80.40%   +0.03%     
  Complexity      957      957              
============================================
  Files            73       73              
  Lines          5334     5334              
  Branches        405      405              
============================================
+ Hits           4287     4289       +2     
+ Misses          878      877       -1     
+ Partials        169      168       -1     
Impacted Files Coverage 螖 Complexity 螖
...e/cloud/bigquery/storage/v1beta2/StreamWriter.java 85.43% <0.00%> (+0.44%) 37.00% <0.00%> (酶%)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
螖 = absolute <relative> (impact), 酶 = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ace8a95...61a2f04. Read the comment docs.

@stephaniewang526 stephaniewang526 merged commit f4de72c into master Dec 10, 2020
@stephaniewang526 stephaniewang526 deleted the release-v1.7.1-SNAPSHOT branch December 10, 2020 22:26
shubhwip pushed a commit to shubhwip/java-bigquerystorage that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2023
Replace manual attempt at caching via a HashMap with a guava Cache.

Fix googleapis#691
Fix googleapis#698
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
api: bigquerystorage Issues related to the googleapis/java-bigquerystorage API. cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement. type: process A process-related concern. May include testing, release, or the like.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants