-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 897
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
[GAPRINDASHVILI] Compare decimal columns correctly in batch saver #17214
[GAPRINDASHVILI] Compare decimal columns correctly in batch saver #17214
Conversation
This pull request is not mergeable. Please rebase and repush. |
…zable_keys"" This reverts commit 9eab6ed, again merging pull request ManageIQ#17020 from cben/deserializable_keys Compare decimal columns correctly in batch saver (cherry picked from commit d3f7348) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559544
df46123
to
2d79f26
Compare
Checked commits cben/manageiq@b45b8de~...2d79f26 with ruby 2.3.3, rubocop 0.52.1, haml-lint 0.20.0, and yamllint 1.10.0 spec/models/manager_refresh/save_inventory/saver_strategies_spec.rb
|
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.
👍 looks great
miq-bot Y U NO pay attention? |
Backport (again) #17020, the only difference being @Ladas's
.to_s
test fix #17194 (see separate commits).I didn't remember what exactly this test was suppossed to test :-), so wasn't sure that
.to_s
fix retains the test meaning, took me a couple days to understand & experiment...The
.to_s
is fine, thelazy_find
done here is not the part tested.Turns out the test as I wrote it only checked the addition to
map_ids_to_inventory_objects
. It still checks it — breaks without it.The addition to
update_or_destroy_records!
isn't checked because test does just 1 refresh and all quota-related records are new.I can't simply wrap the test in
2.times do ... end
, other parts break.=> I'll maybe try to change the test to pre-create one of quotas before refresh. But that would be a separate PR to master first.EDIT: however, this part is checked by manageiq-providers-kubernetes specs, so I think it's good enough as is.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1559544 (gaprindashvili)