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

DEBUG-2334 run all existing DI tests only on supported configurations #3955

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 26, 2024

Conversation

p-datadog
Copy link
Contributor

Dynamic instrumentation will not work on Ruby 2.5 and JRuby. Some unit tests will pass on those configurations, but there is no reason to run them there because they run on all of the supported configurations already.

What does this PR do?
Add di_test declaration to all existing DI tests that do not have it.

Motivation:
Faster CI runs.

Additional Notes:

How to test the change?

Unsure? Have a question? Request a review!

@p-datadog p-datadog requested a review from a team as a code owner September 25, 2024 17:11
Dynamic instrumentation will not work on Ruby 2.5 and JRuby.
Some unit tests will pass on those configurations, but there is
no reason to run them there because they run on all of the
supported configurations already.
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.84%. Comparing base (a6b9175) to head (cd51b2d).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #3955   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   97.83%   97.84%           
=======================================
  Files        1303     1303           
  Lines       78139    78128   -11     
  Branches     3894     3888    -6     
=======================================
- Hits        76451    76443    -8     
+ Misses       1688     1685    -3     
Flag Coverage Δ
97.84% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Sep 25, 2024

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2024-09-25 17:59:36

Comparing candidate commit cd51b2d in PR branch di-tests with baseline commit a6b9175 in branch master.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 23 metrics, 2 unstable metrics.

@p-datadog p-datadog merged commit bcca296 into master Sep 26, 2024
196 checks passed
@p-datadog p-datadog deleted the di-tests branch September 26, 2024 13:42
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the 2.4.0 milestone Sep 26, 2024
p-datadog pushed a commit to p-datadog/dd-trace-rb that referenced this pull request Sep 27, 2024
* master:
  Delete #body method from Rack request gateway and fixed content-length
  [🤖] Lock Dependency: https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-rb/actions/runs/11052224020
  Remove `builder`
  DEBUG-2334 run all existing DI tests only on supported configurations (DataDog#3955)
  run ci
  Skip appsec:rack
  Retry apt-get install for memory-leaks config
  [🤖] Lock Dependency: https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-rb/actions/runs/11035048086
  Expand rack matrix with latest
  Add tests
  Rescue instrumentation errors
  add comment that get_time_provider setting is internal
  remove get_time_provider option from the public docs
  correct my lambda syntax usage
  Remove obsolete test that never ran
  change the default get_time_provider value, add test for Tracing::SpanOperation when get_time_provider is set
  documentation for the new configuration option
  add new setting `get_time_provider` that allows redefining Core::Utils::Time.get_time method
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants