-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 125
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
Add basic integration test for segment replication #927
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #927 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 84.92% 85.10% +0.18%
+ Complexity 1274 1084 -190
============================================
Files 167 152 -15
Lines 5186 4404 -782
Branches 491 389 -102
============================================
- Hits 4404 3748 -656
+ Misses 574 479 -95
+ Partials 208 177 -31 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this the breaking change? Seems it doesn't work with rolling upgrades, or that is work in progress?
Are you going to add more tests? Seems this one uses basic settings: 1 shard, 1 replica. Also do we need to check scores and order of doc ids in result? I'm not sure what can be a side-effect of segment replication not working correctly.
Thank you @martin-gaievski for reviewing this PR. This PR is work related to bug on core which impacts OS 2.7.0 version. These tests are added to provide basic validation that kNN indices works with segment replication. Added more details in #927
Yes, I plan to add bwc tests as follow up of this PR. With segment replication, replica shard syncs segment files from primary. Thus, verifying doc count on all shard copies (specially replica) is sufficient. When segment replication is not working correctly, the replica wouldn't be able to copy files correctly and thus shouldn't have same documents which were ingested. |
@dreamer-89 looks like there are no more comments for code itself, could you please re-run all the CI checks |
@dreamer-89 are you still working on this PR? |
Thanks @navneet1v @martin-gaievski for checking in. Please let me know if you have any open questions/concerns regarding this change. If not, lets move forward with PR approval and code merge. [Edit]: I did force push due to conflict on rebase against main |
Signed-off-by: Suraj Singh <surajrider@gmail.com>
57b8681
to
eb5fe85
Compare
@dreamer-89 the build is broken please fix the build. |
Description
This PR adds an integration test to do sanity for segment replication.
Issues Resolved
#921
Check List
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.