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.

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

Cosmos: Review tests throwing client-evaluation exceptions #17246

Open
ajcvickers opened this issue Aug 18, 2019 · 0 comments
Open

Cosmos: Review tests throwing client-evaluation exceptions #17246

ajcvickers opened this issue Aug 18, 2019 · 0 comments

Comments

@ajcvickers
Copy link
Member

Cosmos has ~1000 tests disabled referencing #14935 (now referencing this issue). Filing this issue to handle these and either skip or check an appropriate exception message is being thrown.

@ajcvickers ajcvickers added this to the Backlog milestone Aug 19, 2019
@AndriySvyryd AndriySvyryd changed the title Handle client-evaluation exceptions in Cosmos Cosmos: Review tests throwing client-evaluation exceptions Aug 21, 2019
@ajcvickers ajcvickers modified the milestones: Backlog, MQ Sep 11, 2020
ajcvickers added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 17, 2021
Part of #26088 and #17235

Ideas for better catching behavior changes in the product code. Specifically:
- Detect when a negative case stops failing
- Detect when a negative case starts failing in a different way

Fundamental approach: don't skip tests.

In NorthwindAggregateOperatorsQueryTests, we had:
- Negative cases that were no longer failing
- Negative cases that were skipped for all providers, but worked on some. For example:
  - Failed on relational, but passed on in-memory
  - Failed on relational, but passed on Cosmos
  - Failed on SQL Server, but passed on SQLite
- Negative cases that failed in different ways on different providers

Specifics:
- If a test throws, catch the exception
  - Were feasible, also validate the exception message or error number
- Always call base where possible, rather than repeating the query in an overriden test
- Add a standard comment where we have a bug or enhancement tracking the issue. For example:
  - `// Contains over subquery. Issue #17246.`
- Always have an `AssertSql` call in Cosmos and SQL Server tests
  - Where we expect a provider-specific class to verify SQL, then add a test that checks all test methods are overriden.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants