-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17.7k
fix(explore): stop metric edits from bleeding across metrics with duplicate optionNames #41208
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
Open
jesperct
wants to merge
4
commits into
apache:master
Choose a base branch
from
jesperct:fix/metrics-shared-optionname-edit
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+156
−9
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
8c7dc61
fix(explore): keep metric optionName unique so edits don't bleed acro…
jesperct 5abf4a2
fix(explore): dedupe optionName in the DnD metric control too
jesperct 5fbd25f
test(explore): assert the edited metric propagates, not just that the…
jesperct f1071aa
test(explore): cover optionName dedupe for SQL adhoc metrics
jesperct File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 assertion only verifies the untouched AVG(value) metric is preserved. It does not verify the edited SUM(value)→MAX(value) metric was actually saved. If the save operation fails to propagate the edit, this test passes incorrectly. Per BITO.md rule [6262], tests must validate actual behavior, not just partial outcomes.
Code Review Run #168057
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (Manage Rules)
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.
Strengthened the assertion to also check the edited metric saved as MAX(value), so a dropped edit can't pass on the surviving AVG alone. dfc4266.
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 reviewer's suggestion is appropriate. The test currently only verifies that the untouched metric is preserved, but it fails to confirm that the intended edit (SUM(value) to MAX(value)) was successfully applied. Strengthening the assertion to check for the presence of the updated metric ensures the test validates the full behavior of the save operation.