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

Revert log level changes in SanityChecker #465

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 9, 2020

Conversation

Jauntbox
Copy link
Contributor

@Jauntbox Jauntbox commented Mar 7, 2020

Related issues
n/a

Describe the proposed solution
Default logging level for the SanityChecker statistics was changed, but we want these at INFO level.

Describe alternatives you've considered
n/a

Additional context
n/a

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 7, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #465 into master will not change coverage by %.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #465   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   86.99%   86.99%           
=======================================
  Files         344      344           
  Lines       11576    11576           
  Branches      370      370           
=======================================
  Hits        10070    10070           
  Misses       1506     1506           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...rce/op/stages/impl/preparators/SanityChecker.scala 91.48% <100.00%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update eabb33e...635e677. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@gerashegalov gerashegalov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@clin-projects clin-projects merged commit 8087834 into master Mar 9, 2020
@clin-projects clin-projects deleted the km/revert-loglevel branch March 9, 2020 22:05
@nicodv nicodv mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2020
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.

4 participants