Skip to content

Conversation

@Vaibhav090420
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Please include a summary of the change, motivation and context.

Testing

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Please summarize what did you test and what needs to be tested e.g. deployed and tested helm chart locally.

Checklist:

  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

Documentation

Make sure that you have documented corresponding changes in this repository or hypertrace docs repo if required.

@Vaibhav090420 Vaibhav090420 requested a review from a team as a code owner February 19, 2025 08:42
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 19, 2025

Test Results

134 tests  ±0   134 ✅ ±0   56s ⏱️ -2s
 31 suites ±0     0 💤 ±0 
 31 files   ±0     0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 3b3c3b2. ± Comparison against base commit 8352a60.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 19, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 32 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 76.14%. Comparing base (7a59a85) to head (eacad90).
Report is 26 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...service/LabelApplicationRuleConfigServiceImpl.java 0.00% 32 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main     #277      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     79.93%   76.14%   -3.80%     
- Complexity      496      543      +47     
============================================
  Files            55       59       +4     
  Lines          2432     2712     +280     
  Branches        108      123      +15     
============================================
+ Hits           1944     2065     +121     
- Misses          427      573     +146     
- Partials         61       74      +13     
Flag Coverage Δ
integration ?
unit 76.14% <0.00%> (-2.34%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

try {
RequestContext requestContext = RequestContext.CURRENT.get();
LabelApplicationRule labelApplicationRule =
getAllLabelApplicationRules(requestContext).stream()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't need to fetch all label application rules in this case. Use getData(...) method in store impl.

RequestContext requestContext = RequestContext.CURRENT.get();
LabelApplicationRule rule =
this.labelApplicationRuleStore
.getData(requestContext, request.getId())
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This would also need to respect the deleted system IDs (another benefit from sharing the existing RPC)

@Vaibhav090420 Vaibhav090420 enabled auto-merge (squash) February 20, 2025 17:52
@Vaibhav090420 Vaibhav090420 merged commit 27df06f into main Feb 24, 2025
9 checks passed
@Vaibhav090420 Vaibhav090420 deleted the ENG-57596 branch February 24, 2025 09:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants