Skip to content

Conversation

@Jonas-Kirchhoff
Copy link

rework test data storage and capture

  • add new alternative test data capturerer capture_test_data_memory_sensistive.py
  • implement new test data capturerer in ListOfTestCases and ubuntu-workflow
  • do not remove existing test data capturerer, instead present this one as alternative

@github-actions github-actions bot added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation L CI CMake labels Sep 24, 2025
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Sep 24, 2025

Coverage Status

coverage: 99.186%. remained the same
when pulling 2db2d3a on rework_data_storage
into f699b0c on main.

@Jonas-Kirchhoff Jonas-Kirchhoff marked this pull request as ready for review September 25, 2025 11:56
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the L label Sep 26, 2025
command = (
"CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS test_results(",
"timestamp INT, " # when the test-run was started
"timestamp INT, " # NEEDS TO BE REMOVED!!! # when the test-run was started
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what's this for?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you, this comment from development is un-necessary and must be removed.

run: |
mkdir test_report
mv TestResults.db test_report/TestResults.db
mv MemoryEfficientTestResults.db test_report/MemoryEfficientTestResults.db
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what's the difference between "MemoryEfficientTestResults.db" and "MemoryEfficientTestResultData.db"? Why the need for both?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The difference between the two data-bases is their role: MemoryEfficientTestResultData.db takes over the role of TestResultData.db as the persistent storage of test results, while MemoryEfficientTestResults.db takes the role of TestResults.db as the most recent test report. The latter is not persistently stored, but given to the artifact of the ubuntu workflow. In particular in case that TestResultData.db becomes large, this is more memory efficient than storing the former as artifact.

"cpp_standard TEXT, ", # cpp-standard
"passed_cases INT, ", # number of passed test-cases
"failed_cases INT, ", # number of failed test-cases
"skipped_cases INT, ", # number if skipped test-cases
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

typo in comment: number of skipped test-cases

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you!

Copy link
Collaborator

@Erikhu1 Erikhu1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please fix merge conflict in JLS-22.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the L label Sep 29, 2025
@Jonas-Kirchhoff Jonas-Kirchhoff merged commit afab04e into main Sep 29, 2025
83 checks passed
Erikhu1 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 14, 2025
* adapt report-names

* fix indentation style

* add  more memory-efficient test-data capturer

* add a bit of documentation

* adapt references to use new test-report

* adapt ubuntu workflow

* adapt test to changed reference

* rename non-existing column "skipped assertions" to correct name "failed assertions"

* identify tests uniquely

* fix typo in comments

* update reference using the persistent data storage

* Merge origin/main into rework_data_storage
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

CI CMake documentation Improvements or additions to documentation L

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants