-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.6k
[cassandra] Give responsibility of creating v2 factory to storage backend #7228
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
@yurishkuro As far I can understand this is the meaning of removing conversions. I maybe wrong but after doing this for other backends we can refactoring E2E tests. I aim to remove this type of conversion:
Am I right? If this seems right, I will start refactoring for cassandra in this PR |
sorry I don't follow the purpose of this, please elaborate. |
@yurishkuro So the second check point of the issue says this |
@yurishkuro I have a doubt, if we will refactor the integration tests to use the v2 factory directly, will it be ok if we will not be testing the flags in e2e tests as v2 factory is directly initialized by config not by flags! |
the flags have their own unit tests, the e2e tests use flags not because we need to test them but because there was no other way to initialize v1 factories. Since we can use the configs now we can just populate the config struct instead of flags. |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #7228 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 96.20% 96.17% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 370 372 +2
Lines 22216 22259 +43
==========================================
+ Hits 21374 21407 +33
- Misses 630 638 +8
- Partials 212 214 +2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
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.
aside from one question - LGTM
727ec26
to
b82010c
Compare
Which problem is this PR solving?
Description of the changes
How was this change tested?
Checklist
jaeger
:make lint test
jaeger-ui
:npm run lint
andnpm run test