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

[TASK] Revert the forced datagen_seed for integration tests that failed with year 0 out of range #10080

Closed
NVnavkumar opened this issue Dec 19, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #10085
Closed

[TASK] Revert the forced datagen_seed for integration tests that failed with year 0 out of range #10080

NVnavkumar opened this issue Dec 19, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #10085
Assignees
@NVnavkumar
Labels
task Work required that improves the product but is not user facing test Only impacts tests

Comments

@NVnavkumar
Copy link
Collaborator

Once #9996 is merged, many tests were patched to force the datagen_seed to 0 to allow CI to pass. This now should be reverted since this error should not show up anymore after that PR is merged.
@NVnavkumar NVnavkumar added ? - Needs Triage Need team to review and classify test Only impacts tests task Work required that improves the product but is not user facing labels Dec 19, 2023
@NVnavkumar NVnavkumar self-assigned this Dec 19, 2023
@NVnavkumar
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Revert forcing the DATAGEN_SEED to zero in issue #9701, issue #9820, issue #9916, issue #9936

@mattahrens mattahrens removed the ? - Needs Triage Need team to review and classify label Dec 19, 2023
@NVnavkumar NVnavkumar mentioned this issue Dec 20, 2023
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@NVnavkumar NVnavkumar

Labels
task Work required that improves the product but is not user facing test Only impacts tests
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Update tests that originally restricted the Spark timestamp range NVnavkumar/spark-rapids
2 participants
@mattahrens @NVnavkumar