-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 225
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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SqlServerAudit #1433
SqlServerAudit #1433
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #1433 +/- ##
=====================================
- Coverage 98% 90% -8%
=====================================
Files 38 40 +2
Lines 5603 6085 +482
=====================================
+ Hits 5497 5503 +6
- Misses 106 582 +476 |
@Fiander Awesome work! 😃 Let me know when this is ready for review. |
At the moment i am combining this and a home renovation. so slow progress. these are only 2 out of a 3 project. with a few months DatabaseAuditSpecification should be ready. |
No worries, there a not hurry. 🙂 Sounds like a good prioritization. 😄 Tag me if I can help with the anything. Well, in the resource, not the home renovation. 😉 |
should now pass meta checks.
made some last changed so it now should pass the meta checks. p.s. could really use some help on the house ;-) |
- Changes to SqlSetup - Fix typo in SqlSetup strings (issue #1419).
…nd fix hashtables (#1447) - Changes to SqlServerDsc - Add .gitattributes file to checkout file correctly with CRLF. - Updated .vscode/analyzersettings.psd1 file to correct use PSSA rules and custom rules in VS Code. - Fix hashtables to align with style guideline (issue #1437). - Changes to SqlServerMaxDop - Fix line endings in code which did not use the correct format.
Hi, I finally gotten far enough with the house so I can continu with this. but I am absolutely not experienced enough for the unit testing. I truly have no clue on where to start and what to do. Are they really needed? I read trough some of the others, and they seem to do the same as the integration tests but not to an actual server but to some fake smo objects who are pretending to be an actual SQL Server? is this correct? |
Sorry that I have not answered for a long time, been busy getting the new CI pipeline working for the DSC Community. Unit tests is needed. Without them we don't merge changes. Unit tests can verify that all code paths work, which can be harder to do with integration tests some tests might not even be able, or harder, to be tested, like throwing an error or changing the state of the build worker in such a manner that it cannot recover. Unit tests also shows us the code coverage of the tests where integration tests does not since the LCM is running the tests. Unit tests mocks the actually action and instead returns a state, the unit test verifies that the state returned is the one that was expected. Normally you mock cmdlets, but since the are so few cmdlets for SQL Server we have to resort to using the SMO in the code. That means that sometimes we have to mock the SMO classes, or make wrapper functions for the SMO calls that in turn we can mock easily. Those wrappers have minimal code (one-liners) and does not need to be unit tested. The new CI pipeline has merged in this repository. This changed the folder structure, and also removed the dev branch. Please rebase against the master branch, and make sure to get your changes into the the file in the new location (under Read more here about the new coding workflow: Let me know if you need further help. |
Pull Request (PR) description
This Pull Request (PR) fixes the following issues
Task list
Entry should say what was changed, and how that affects users (if applicable).
and comment-based help.
This change is