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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

fix: set selector_result_cache_size in unit test again #4641

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 29, 2024
Merged

fix: set selector_result_cache_size in unit test again #4641

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 29, 2024

Conversation

WenyXu
Copy link
Member

@WenyXu WenyXu commented Aug 29, 2024

I hereby agree to the terms of the GreptimeDB CLA.

Refer to a related PR or issue link (optional)

What's changed and what's your intention?

fix: https://github.com/GreptimeTeam/greptimedb/actions/runs/10607915769/job/29401223051
set selector_result_cache_size in unit test again

Checklist

  • I have written the necessary rustdoc comments.
  • I have added the necessary unit tests and integration tests.
  • This PR requires documentation updates.

@WenyXu WenyXu requested a review from a team as a code owner August 29, 2024 06:16
@github-actions github-actions bot added the docs-not-required This change does not impact docs. label Aug 29, 2024
@coderabbitai coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Aug 29, 2024

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 29, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 84.69%. Comparing base (e404e9d) to head (d0f09b0).
Report is 14 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4641      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.89%   84.69%   -0.21%     
==========================================
  Files        1101     1103       +2     
  Lines      197166   197873     +707     
==========================================
+ Hits       167388   167585     +197     
- Misses      29778    30288     +510

@shuiyisong shuiyisong added this pull request to the merge queue Aug 29, 2024
Merged via the queue into GreptimeTeam:main with commit 79f40a7 Aug 29, 2024
34 checks passed
CookiePieWw pushed a commit to CookiePieWw/greptimedb that referenced this pull request Sep 17, 2024
@WenyXu @CookiePieWw
fix: set selector_result_cache_size in unit test again (GreptimeTea…
e9a1ceb 
…m#4641)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@shuiyisong shuiyisong shuiyisong approved these changes

@zyy17 zyy17 zyy17 approved these changes

@fengjiachun fengjiachun Awaiting requested review from fengjiachun

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
docs-not-required This change does not impact docs.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@WenyXu @zyy17 @shuiyisong