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

Addition of pytest case coverage of backend and AnalysisBase.run() using different n_workers values #4768

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Nov 27, 2024

Conversation

talagayev
Copy link
Member

@talagayev talagayev commented Oct 27, 2024

Fixes #4649

Adds the coverage of the ValueError case, where backend and AnalysisBase.run() have
different values for n_workers

Changes made in this Pull Request:

  • Added of test_n_workers_conflict_raises_value_error in test_base.py to cover cases, where
    both backend and AnalysisBase.run() have different values of n_workers

PR Checklist

  • Tests?
  • Docs?
  • CHANGELOG updated?
  • Issue raised/referenced?

Developers certificate of origin


📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://mdanalysis--4768.org.readthedocs.build/en/4768/

Added case of backend and AnalysisBase.run() having different worker numbers
Added Changelog for the pytest cover case of Backend and AnalysisBase having different n_worker values
typo adjust
@pep8speaks
Copy link

pep8speaks commented Oct 27, 2024

Hello @talagayev! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for PEP 8 issues, and found:

There are currently no PEP 8 issues detected in this Pull Request. Cheers! 🍻

Comment last updated at 2024-11-26 23:17:06 UTC

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 27, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 93.66%. Comparing base (7e521de) to head (7b2b944).
Report is 1 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #4768      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    93.67%   93.66%   -0.02%     
===========================================
  Files          177      189      +12     
  Lines        21742    22808    +1066     
  Branches      3055     3055              
===========================================
+ Hits         20367    21362     +995     
- Misses         928     1000      +72     
+ Partials       447      446       -1     

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

Copy link
Member

@hmacdope hmacdope left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM thanks @talagayev

removed line due to duplication
@talagayev
Copy link
Member Author

talagayev commented Oct 28, 2024

How is it now the case, would this and the other PR, which also only adresses a pytest be currently frozen until the release of 2.8.0 and merged after the release of 2.8.0?

@talagayev
Copy link
Member Author

LGTM thanks @talagayev

Happy to help :)

@hmacdope
Copy link
Member

How is it now the case, would this and the other PR, which also only adresses a pytest be currently frozen until the release of 2.8.0 and merged after the release of 2.8.0?

I believe we are in a code freeze for now, can be merged if we like but I will leave at discretion of release manager, @IAlibay.

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member

IAlibay commented Oct 28, 2024

If it's not on the 2.8 milestone, I would prefer it if we didn't merge it until after the release.

Copy link
Member

@IAlibay IAlibay left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same as the other PR.

package/CHANGELOG Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
removed changelog change
@talagayev
Copy link
Member Author

If it's not on the 2.8 milestone, I would prefer it if we didn't merge it until after the release.

Yup sounds good :)

@RMeli RMeli enabled auto-merge (squash) November 27, 2024 15:51
@RMeli RMeli dismissed IAlibay’s stale review November 27, 2024 15:52

Comments have been adressed, but for some reason I can't ask a re-review.

@RMeli RMeli merged commit abc9806 into MDAnalysis:develop Nov 27, 2024
23 of 24 checks passed
@talagayev
Copy link
Member Author

Could it possibly connected that I asked for a re-review that @RMeli you cannot ask for a re-review?

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.

Error when n_workers specified twice should be tested
6 participants