Skip to content

MINOR: migrate ometa from unittest to pytest#25927

Merged
IceS2 merged 4 commits intomainfrom
migrate-ometa-integration-tests
Feb 17, 2026
Merged

MINOR: migrate ometa from unittest to pytest#25927
IceS2 merged 4 commits intomainfrom
migrate-ometa-integration-tests

Conversation

@IceS2
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@IceS2 IceS2 commented Feb 17, 2026

Modernize ometa integration tests to pytest style

Migrates all 36 ometa integration test files from unittest.TestCase to pytest fixtures and assertions.

Changes:

  • Replace TestCase classes with pytest fixtures (@pytest.fixture)
  • Convert setUp()/tearDown() to fixture yield + cleanup pattern
  • Module-scoped fixtures for expensive setup (containers, services)
  • Replace self.assertEqual() with assert statements
  • Add retry logic (_safe_create_or_update) for parallel test runs
  • Proper cleanup with hard deletes to prevent test pollution

Benefits:

  • ✅ Compatible with pytest-xdist for parallel execution
  • ✅ Better test isolation (fixtures clean up even on failure)
  • ✅ Follows CLAUDE.md testing philosophy
  • ✅ More readable (plain assertions vs unittest methods)
  • ✅ Reduced test runtime (shared module fixtures)

@IceS2 IceS2 requested a review from a team as a code owner February 17, 2026 09:19
@github-actions github-actions Bot added Ingestion safe to test Add this label to run secure Github workflows on PRs labels Feb 17, 2026
gitar-bot[bot]
gitar-bot Bot reviewed Feb 17, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment thread ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/conftest.py
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Feb 17, 2026 •
edited
Loading

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: openmetadata-ingestion-base-slim:trivy (debian 12.13)

Vulnerabilities (40)

Package Vulnerability ID Severity Installed Version Fixed Version
linux-libc-dev CVE-2024-46786 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-21946 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-22022 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-22083 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-22107 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-22121 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-37926 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-38022 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-38129 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-38361 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-38718 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-39871 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-68340 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-68349 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-68800 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-71085 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2025-71116 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-22984 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-22990 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23001 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23010 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23054 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23074 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23084 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23097 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23116 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23120 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23121 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23124 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23125 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23126 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23128 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23133 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23139 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23140 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23142 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23144 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23146 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23156 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1
linux-libc-dev CVE-2026-23164 🚨 HIGH 6.1.159-1 6.1.162-1

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: Java

Vulnerabilities (33)

Package Vulnerability ID Severity Installed Version Fixed Version
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core CVE-2025-52999 🚨 HIGH 2.12.7 2.15.0
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core CVE-2025-52999 🚨 HIGH 2.13.4 2.15.0
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind CVE-2022-42003 🚨 HIGH 2.12.7 2.12.7.1, 2.13.4.2
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind CVE-2022-42004 🚨 HIGH 2.12.7 2.12.7.1, 2.13.4
com.google.code.gson:gson CVE-2022-25647 🚨 HIGH 2.2.4 2.8.9
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2021-22569 🚨 HIGH 3.3.0 3.16.1, 3.18.2, 3.19.2
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2022-3509 🚨 HIGH 3.3.0 3.16.3, 3.19.6, 3.20.3, 3.21.7
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2022-3510 🚨 HIGH 3.3.0 3.16.3, 3.19.6, 3.20.3, 3.21.7
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2024-7254 🚨 HIGH 3.3.0 3.25.5, 4.27.5, 4.28.2
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2021-22569 🚨 HIGH 3.7.1 3.16.1, 3.18.2, 3.19.2
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2022-3509 🚨 HIGH 3.7.1 3.16.3, 3.19.6, 3.20.3, 3.21.7
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2022-3510 🚨 HIGH 3.7.1 3.16.3, 3.19.6, 3.20.3, 3.21.7
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2024-7254 🚨 HIGH 3.7.1 3.25.5, 4.27.5, 4.28.2
com.nimbusds:nimbus-jose-jwt CVE-2023-52428 🚨 HIGH 9.8.1 9.37.2
com.squareup.okhttp3:okhttp CVE-2021-0341 🚨 HIGH 3.12.12 4.9.2
commons-beanutils:commons-beanutils CVE-2025-48734 🚨 HIGH 1.9.4 1.11.0
commons-io:commons-io CVE-2024-47554 🚨 HIGH 2.8.0 2.14.0
dnsjava:dnsjava CVE-2024-25638 🚨 HIGH 2.1.7 3.6.0
io.netty:netty-codec-http2 CVE-2025-55163 🚨 HIGH 4.1.96.Final 4.2.4.Final, 4.1.124.Final
io.netty:netty-codec-http2 GHSA-xpw8-rcwv-8f8p 🚨 HIGH 4.1.96.Final 4.1.100.Final
io.netty:netty-handler CVE-2025-24970 🚨 HIGH 4.1.96.Final 4.1.118.Final
net.minidev:json-smart CVE-2021-31684 🚨 HIGH 1.3.2 1.3.3, 2.4.4
net.minidev:json-smart CVE-2023-1370 🚨 HIGH 1.3.2 2.4.9
org.apache.avro:avro CVE-2024-47561 🔥 CRITICAL 1.7.7 1.11.4
org.apache.avro:avro CVE-2023-39410 🚨 HIGH 1.7.7 1.11.3
org.apache.derby:derby CVE-2022-46337 🔥 CRITICAL 10.14.2.0 10.14.3, 10.15.2.1, 10.16.1.2, 10.17.1.0
org.apache.ivy:ivy CVE-2022-46751 🚨 HIGH 2.5.1 2.5.2
org.apache.mesos:mesos CVE-2018-1330 🚨 HIGH 1.4.3 1.6.0
org.apache.thrift:libthrift CVE-2019-0205 🚨 HIGH 0.12.0 0.13.0
org.apache.thrift:libthrift CVE-2020-13949 🚨 HIGH 0.12.0 0.14.0
org.apache.zookeeper:zookeeper CVE-2023-44981 🔥 CRITICAL 3.6.3 3.7.2, 3.8.3, 3.9.1
org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server CVE-2024-13009 🚨 HIGH 9.4.56.v20240826 9.4.57.v20241219
org.lz4:lz4-java CVE-2025-12183 🚨 HIGH 1.8.0 1.8.1

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: Node.js

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: Python

Vulnerabilities (9)

Package Vulnerability ID Severity Installed Version Fixed Version
apache-airflow CVE-2025-68438 🚨 HIGH 3.1.5 3.1.6
apache-airflow CVE-2025-68675 🚨 HIGH 3.1.5 3.1.6
cryptography CVE-2026-26007 🚨 HIGH 42.0.8 46.0.5
jaraco.context CVE-2026-23949 🚨 HIGH 6.0.1 6.1.0
starlette CVE-2025-62727 🚨 HIGH 0.48.0 0.49.1
urllib3 CVE-2025-66418 🚨 HIGH 1.26.20 2.6.0
urllib3 CVE-2025-66471 🚨 HIGH 1.26.20 2.6.0
urllib3 CVE-2026-21441 🚨 HIGH 1.26.20 2.6.3
wheel CVE-2026-24049 🚨 HIGH 0.45.1 0.46.2

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /etc/ssl/private/ssl-cert-snakeoil.key

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /ingestion/pipelines/extended_sample_data.yaml

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /ingestion/pipelines/lineage.yaml

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /ingestion/pipelines/sample_data.json

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /ingestion/pipelines/sample_data.yaml

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /ingestion/pipelines/sample_data_aut.yaml

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /ingestion/pipelines/sample_usage.json

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /ingestion/pipelines/sample_usage.yaml

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /ingestion/pipelines/sample_usage_aut.yaml

No Vulnerabilities Found

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Feb 17, 2026 •
edited
Loading

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: openmetadata-ingestion:trivy (debian 12.12)

Vulnerabilities (4)

Package Vulnerability ID Severity Installed Version Fixed Version
libpam-modules CVE-2025-6020 🚨 HIGH 1.5.2-6+deb12u1 1.5.2-6+deb12u2
libpam-modules-bin CVE-2025-6020 🚨 HIGH 1.5.2-6+deb12u1 1.5.2-6+deb12u2
libpam-runtime CVE-2025-6020 🚨 HIGH 1.5.2-6+deb12u1 1.5.2-6+deb12u2
libpam0g CVE-2025-6020 🚨 HIGH 1.5.2-6+deb12u1 1.5.2-6+deb12u2

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: Java

Vulnerabilities (33)

Package Vulnerability ID Severity Installed Version Fixed Version
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core CVE-2025-52999 🚨 HIGH 2.12.7 2.15.0
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core CVE-2025-52999 🚨 HIGH 2.13.4 2.15.0
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind CVE-2022-42003 🚨 HIGH 2.12.7 2.12.7.1, 2.13.4.2
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind CVE-2022-42004 🚨 HIGH 2.12.7 2.12.7.1, 2.13.4
com.google.code.gson:gson CVE-2022-25647 🚨 HIGH 2.2.4 2.8.9
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2021-22569 🚨 HIGH 3.3.0 3.16.1, 3.18.2, 3.19.2
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2022-3509 🚨 HIGH 3.3.0 3.16.3, 3.19.6, 3.20.3, 3.21.7
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2022-3510 🚨 HIGH 3.3.0 3.16.3, 3.19.6, 3.20.3, 3.21.7
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2024-7254 🚨 HIGH 3.3.0 3.25.5, 4.27.5, 4.28.2
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2021-22569 🚨 HIGH 3.7.1 3.16.1, 3.18.2, 3.19.2
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2022-3509 🚨 HIGH 3.7.1 3.16.3, 3.19.6, 3.20.3, 3.21.7
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2022-3510 🚨 HIGH 3.7.1 3.16.3, 3.19.6, 3.20.3, 3.21.7
com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java CVE-2024-7254 🚨 HIGH 3.7.1 3.25.5, 4.27.5, 4.28.2
com.nimbusds:nimbus-jose-jwt CVE-2023-52428 🚨 HIGH 9.8.1 9.37.2
com.squareup.okhttp3:okhttp CVE-2021-0341 🚨 HIGH 3.12.12 4.9.2
commons-beanutils:commons-beanutils CVE-2025-48734 🚨 HIGH 1.9.4 1.11.0
commons-io:commons-io CVE-2024-47554 🚨 HIGH 2.8.0 2.14.0
dnsjava:dnsjava CVE-2024-25638 🚨 HIGH 2.1.7 3.6.0
io.netty:netty-codec-http2 CVE-2025-55163 🚨 HIGH 4.1.96.Final 4.2.4.Final, 4.1.124.Final
io.netty:netty-codec-http2 GHSA-xpw8-rcwv-8f8p 🚨 HIGH 4.1.96.Final 4.1.100.Final
io.netty:netty-handler CVE-2025-24970 🚨 HIGH 4.1.96.Final 4.1.118.Final
net.minidev:json-smart CVE-2021-31684 🚨 HIGH 1.3.2 1.3.3, 2.4.4
net.minidev:json-smart CVE-2023-1370 🚨 HIGH 1.3.2 2.4.9
org.apache.avro:avro CVE-2024-47561 🔥 CRITICAL 1.7.7 1.11.4
org.apache.avro:avro CVE-2023-39410 🚨 HIGH 1.7.7 1.11.3
org.apache.derby:derby CVE-2022-46337 🔥 CRITICAL 10.14.2.0 10.14.3, 10.15.2.1, 10.16.1.2, 10.17.1.0
org.apache.ivy:ivy CVE-2022-46751 🚨 HIGH 2.5.1 2.5.2
org.apache.mesos:mesos CVE-2018-1330 🚨 HIGH 1.4.3 1.6.0
org.apache.thrift:libthrift CVE-2019-0205 🚨 HIGH 0.12.0 0.13.0
org.apache.thrift:libthrift CVE-2020-13949 🚨 HIGH 0.12.0 0.14.0
org.apache.zookeeper:zookeeper CVE-2023-44981 🔥 CRITICAL 3.6.3 3.7.2, 3.8.3, 3.9.1
org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server CVE-2024-13009 🚨 HIGH 9.4.56.v20240826 9.4.57.v20241219
org.lz4:lz4-java CVE-2025-12183 🚨 HIGH 1.8.0 1.8.1

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: Node.js

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: Python

Vulnerabilities (19)

Package Vulnerability ID Severity Installed Version Fixed Version
Werkzeug CVE-2024-34069 🚨 HIGH 2.2.3 3.0.3
aiohttp CVE-2025-69223 🚨 HIGH 3.12.12 3.13.3
aiohttp CVE-2025-69223 🚨 HIGH 3.13.2 3.13.3
apache-airflow CVE-2025-68438 🚨 HIGH 3.1.5 3.1.6
apache-airflow CVE-2025-68675 🚨 HIGH 3.1.5 3.1.6
azure-core CVE-2026-21226 🚨 HIGH 1.37.0 1.38.0
cryptography CVE-2026-26007 🚨 HIGH 42.0.8 46.0.5
jaraco.context CVE-2026-23949 🚨 HIGH 5.3.0 6.1.0
jaraco.context CVE-2026-23949 🚨 HIGH 6.0.1 6.1.0
protobuf CVE-2026-0994 🚨 HIGH 4.25.8 6.33.5, 5.29.6
pyasn1 CVE-2026-23490 🚨 HIGH 0.6.1 0.6.2
python-multipart CVE-2026-24486 🚨 HIGH 0.0.20 0.0.22
ray CVE-2025-62593 🔥 CRITICAL 2.47.1 2.52.0
starlette CVE-2025-62727 🚨 HIGH 0.48.0 0.49.1
urllib3 CVE-2025-66418 🚨 HIGH 1.26.20 2.6.0
urllib3 CVE-2025-66471 🚨 HIGH 1.26.20 2.6.0
urllib3 CVE-2026-21441 🚨 HIGH 1.26.20 2.6.3
wheel CVE-2026-24049 🚨 HIGH 0.45.1 0.46.2
wheel CVE-2026-24049 🚨 HIGH 0.45.1 0.46.2

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: usr/bin/docker

Vulnerabilities (4)

Package Vulnerability ID Severity Installed Version Fixed Version
stdlib CVE-2025-68121 🔥 CRITICAL v1.25.5 1.24.13, 1.25.7, 1.26.0-rc.3
stdlib CVE-2025-61726 🚨 HIGH v1.25.5 1.24.12, 1.25.6
stdlib CVE-2025-61728 🚨 HIGH v1.25.5 1.24.12, 1.25.6
stdlib CVE-2025-61730 🚨 HIGH v1.25.5 1.24.12, 1.25.6

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /etc/ssl/private/ssl-cert-snakeoil.key

No Vulnerabilities Found

🛡️ TRIVY SCAN RESULT 🛡️

Target: /home/airflow/openmetadata-airflow-apis/openmetadata_managed_apis.egg-info/PKG-INFO

No Vulnerabilities Found

gitar-bot[bot]
gitar-bot Bot reviewed Feb 17, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment thread ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/conftest.py Outdated
gitar-bot[bot]
gitar-bot Bot reviewed Feb 17, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment thread ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/test_ometa_data_contract_api.py

@classmethod
def tearDownClass(cls) -> None:
def test_create_data_contract(self, metadata, test_table, data_contract_request):
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@gitar-bot gitar-bot Bot Feb 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Quality: Data contract tests use manual cleanup instead of fixtures

All 4 test methods in TestOMetaDataContractAPI manually call metadata.delete(entity=DataContract, ...) at the end of the test body. If an assertion fails before the delete call, the entity leaks and won't be cleaned up. This pattern directly contradicts the PR's stated goal of "Better test isolation (fixtures clean up even on failure)".

Every other entity type has a factory fixture (e.g., create_dashboard, create_table, create_topic) that accumulates created entities and deletes them in a finalizer. DataContract should follow the same pattern with a create_data_contract factory fixture, or alternatively wrap the test body in try/finally blocks (as done in test_ometa_domains_api.py's test_add_remove_assets_to_data_product_with_special_chars).

Since create_or_update is idempotent, a leaked entity from a failed test will be overwritten by the next test's create call, so this is not a critical issue — but it's an inconsistency in the migration approach.

Was this helpful? React with 👍 / 👎

@gitar-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

gitar-bot Bot commented Feb 17, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Code Review 👍 Approved with suggestions 2 resolved / 3 findings

Well-executed unittest→pytest migration across 36 files. The .root email fix is resolved; data contract tests still use manual cleanup instead of factory fixtures, risking entity leaks on assertion failures.

💡 Quality: Data contract tests use manual cleanup instead of fixtures

📄 ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/test_ometa_data_contract_api.py:122 📄 ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/test_ometa_data_contract_api.py:137 📄 ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/test_ometa_data_contract_api.py:152 📄 ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/test_ometa_data_contract_api.py:165

All 4 test methods in TestOMetaDataContractAPI manually call metadata.delete(entity=DataContract, ...) at the end of the test body. If an assertion fails before the delete call, the entity leaks and won't be cleaned up. This pattern directly contradicts the PR's stated goal of "Better test isolation (fixtures clean up even on failure)".

Every other entity type has a factory fixture (e.g., create_dashboard, create_table, create_topic) that accumulates created entities and deletes them in a finalizer. DataContract should follow the same pattern with a create_data_contract factory fixture, or alternatively wrap the test body in try/finally blocks (as done in test_ometa_domains_api.py's test_add_remove_assets_to_data_product_with_special_chars).

Since create_or_update is idempotent, a leaked entity from a failed test will be overwritten by the next test's create call, so this is not a critical issue — but it's an inconsistency in the migration approach.

✅ 2 resolved
✅ Quality: Inconsistent EntityName access: missing .root in email

📄 ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/conftest.py:322
The create_user factory fixture uses f"{user_name}@test.com" where user_name is an EntityName (a Pydantic RootModel[str]). Every other place in the test suite that builds an email from an EntityName uses .root explicitly (e.g., f"{user_name.root}@user.com" in test_ometa_rest_api.py, test_ometa_custom_properties_api.py, test_ometa_domains_api.py, test_ometa_role_policy_api.py, etc.).

While Pydantic v2's RootModel[str].__str__() does return the raw string value so this likely works at runtime, using .root explicitly is both safer and consistent with the rest of the codebase.

✅ Bug: _safe_delete is imported but never defined — all tests will fail

📄 ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/conftest.py:52 📄 ingestion/tests/integration/ometa/conftest.py:118
The function _safe_delete is imported in conftest.py via from ..conftest import _safe_delete and used in 12 files (conftest + 11 test files), but it is not defined anywhere in the repository. This will cause an ImportError at pytest collection time, preventing all 36 ometa integration test files from running.

The parent conftest at ingestion/tests/integration/conftest.py does not contain any _safe_delete function. A search across the entire repository confirms no file defines it.

This is used in every module-scoped service fixture's teardown (database_service, dashboard_service, messaging_service, pipeline_service, storage_service, mlmodel_service) as well as all factory fixture teardowns (create_user, create_database, create_chart, create_table, etc.).

Fix: Define _safe_delete in the parent conftest (or in the ometa conftest and adjust imports). Based on the pattern of _safe_create_or_update, it should be something like:

def _safe_delete(metadata, entity, entity_id, recursive=False, hard_delete=False, retries=3):
    """Delete with retry logic and error suppression for cleanup robustness."""
    for attempt in range(retries):
        try:
            metadata.delete(
                entity=entity,
                entity_id=entity_id,
                recursive=recursive,
                hard_delete=hard_delete,
            )
            return
        except Exception:
            if attempt < retries - 1:
                logger.warning("Retry %d/%d: delete %s", attempt + 1, retries, entity.__name__)
                time.sleep(1 * (attempt + 1))
            else:
                logger.warning("Failed to delete %s after %d retries", entity.__name__, retries)
Options

Auto-apply is off → Gitar will not commit updates to this branch.
Display: compact → Showing less information.

Comment with these commands to change:

Auto-apply Compact 
gitar auto-apply:on         

gitar display:verbose

Was this helpful? React with 👍 / 👎 | Gitar

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link
Copy Markdown

sonarqubecloud Bot commented Feb 17, 2026

Quality Gate Passed Quality Gate passed for 'open-metadata-ingestion'

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

@IceS2 IceS2 merged commit 0870ba5 into main Feb 17, 2026
30 of 31 checks passed
@IceS2 IceS2 deleted the migrate-ometa-integration-tests branch February 17, 2026 16:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@gitar-bot gitar-bot[bot] gitar-bot[bot] left review comments

@pmbrull pmbrull pmbrull approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

Ingestion safe to test Add this label to run secure Github workflows on PRs

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@IceS2 @pmbrull