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

Added tests for pkg/descheduler/descheduler.go #5653

Conversation

anujagrawal699
Copy link
Contributor

@anujagrawal699 anujagrawal699 commented Oct 8, 2024

Description:
This pull request enhances the Descheduler component with comprehensive unit tests and improved error handling. The new tests aim to improve code reliability, maintainability, and overall test coverage for descheduling operations.

Added error handling tests in the worker function, including:

  1. Handling invalid key types
  2. Dealing with invalid resource key formats
  3. Proper handling of ResourceBindings that are not found or being deleted

Modifications:

  1. pkg/descheduler/descheduler.go

Test Coverage:

  1. pkg/descheduler/descheduler.go : 59.14% to 80.80%

What type of PR is this?
/kind feature

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes a part of #5470

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

Signed-off-by: Anuj Agrawal <anujagrawal380@gmail.com>
@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Oct 8, 2024
@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Oct 8, 2024
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

⚠️ Please install the 'codecov app svg image' to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 35.31%. Comparing base (f656d9a) to head (c493e04).

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #5653      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   35.23%   35.31%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files         645      645              
  Lines       44891    44891              
==========================================
+ Hits        15817    15852      +35     
+ Misses      27841    27809      -32     
+ Partials     1233     1230       -3     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 35.31% <ø> (+0.07%) ⬆️

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.

@XiShanYongYe-Chang
Copy link
Member

/assign

Copy link
Member

@XiShanYongYe-Chang XiShanYongYe-Chang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thannks~
/lgtm
/approve

@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 9, 2024
@karmada-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: XiShanYongYe-Chang

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Oct 9, 2024
@karmada-bot karmada-bot merged commit c5a5c84 into karmada-io:master Oct 9, 2024
12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants