-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
Split out datafusion-substrait
and datafusion-proto
CI feature checks, increase coverage
#15156
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
Conversation
datafusion-substrait
and datafusion-proto
CI feature checks
# | ||
# Ensure via `cargo check` that the crate can be built with a | ||
# subset of the features packages enabled. | ||
linux-datafusion-common-features: |
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.
The diff makes of hard to read but I just moved what jobs each command was run in -- the overall coverage is the same or better
run: cargo check --profile ci --all-targets --no-default-features -p datafusion-substrait | ||
- name: Check datafusion-substrait (physical) |
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.
this adds coverage of compiling datafusion-substrait with the available feature flags
rust-version: stable | ||
- name: Check datafusion-proto (no-default-features) | ||
run: cargo check --profile ci --all-targets --no-default-features -p datafusion-proto | ||
# fails due to https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/15157 |
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.
This adds coverage for the datafusion-proto crate, and in fact found a bug:
datafusion-substrait
and datafusion-proto
CI feature checksdatafusion-substrait
and datafusion-proto
CI feature checks, increase coverage
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.
This all looks very reasonable to me and a good improvement. I left a note in the issue you raised that we will want to follow up on the commented out check.
Thank you for the review @timsaucer ! |
datafusion-substrait
and datafusion-proto
CI feature checks, increase coveragedatafusion-substrait
and datafusion-proto
CI feature checks, increase coverage
datafusion-substrait
and datafusion-proto
CI feature checks, increase coveragedatafusion-substrait
and datafusion-proto
CI feature checks, increase coverage
Which issue does this PR close?
Rationale for this change
The coverage for feature flags needs to be improved, as explained on #15155
What changes are included in this PR?
Note I will make a follow on PR to add additional coverage for flags in
datafusion-functions
anddatafusion
but I am trying to keep this PR reasonably sizedAre these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?