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

fix(cypress): flake cypress test case #17918

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 4, 2022

Conversation

zhaoyongjie
Copy link
Member

@zhaoyongjie zhaoyongjie commented Jan 4, 2022

SUMMARY

Currently, the master branch has been blocked by a flake test from cypress. This PR fixes it.

BEFORE/AFTER SCREENSHOTS OR ANIMATED GIF

N/A

TESTING INSTRUCTIONS

Cypress guaranteed

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

  • Has associated issue:
  • Required feature flags:
  • Changes UI
  • Includes DB Migration (follow approval process in SIP-59)
    • Migration is atomic, supports rollback & is backwards-compatible
    • Confirm DB migration upgrade and downgrade tested
    • Runtime estimates and downtime expectations provided
  • Introduces new feature or API
  • Removes existing feature or API

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 4, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #17918 (6a652d8) into master (6e59a51) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #17918   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   67.07%   67.07%           
=======================================
  Files        1609     1609           
  Lines       64899    64899           
  Branches     6866     6866           
=======================================
  Hits        43533    43533           
  Misses      19500    19500           
  Partials     1866     1866           
Flag Coverage Δ
javascript 53.77% <ø> (ø)

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


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 6e59a51...6a652d8. Read the comment docs.

@zhaoyongjie zhaoyongjie requested a review from pkdotson January 4, 2022 13:21
Copy link
Member

@villebro villebro left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, also seeing this one flake in one of my PRs - I'm curious if you know how this has been passing if the row counts have been off? I assume we haven't done any changes lately that would have affected these assertions..

@kgabryje
Copy link
Member

kgabryje commented Jan 4, 2022

We don't set an absolute time filter, but a relative one - minus 40 years. The year has changed 4 days ago and we've cut out 1 result.

@villebro
Copy link
Member

villebro commented Jan 4, 2022

Lol, I look forward to redoing this in January 2023 😆

@kgabryje
Copy link
Member

kgabryje commented Jan 4, 2022

Let's merge this PR, but I hope we can fix this properly becuase it's ridiculous 😆

@michael-s-molina michael-s-molina merged commit eff4d38 into apache:master Jan 4, 2022
shcoderAlex pushed a commit to casual-precision/superset that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2022
bwang221 pushed a commit to casual-precision/superset that referenced this pull request Feb 10, 2022
@mistercrunch mistercrunch added 🏷️ bot A label used by `supersetbot` to keep track of which PR where auto-tagged with release labels 🚢 1.5.0 labels Mar 13, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
🏷️ bot A label used by `supersetbot` to keep track of which PR where auto-tagged with release labels size/XS 🚢 1.5.0
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants