Skip to content

Conversation

@nwnt
Copy link
Member

@nwnt nwnt commented Jan 22, 2026

Should be the final set of coverage for range.

cc @serathius

Signed-off-by: Nont <nont@duck.com>
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: nwnt
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign jmhbnz for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

@nwnt: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
pull-etcd-coverage-report 04b2562 link true /test pull-etcd-coverage-report

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 68.42%. Comparing base (9a2b574) to head (04b2562).
⚠️ Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

see 26 files with indirect coverage changes

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #21180      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   68.39%   68.42%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         429      429              
  Lines       35288    35288              
==========================================
+ Hits        24135    24146      +11     
+ Misses       9758     9753       -5     
+ Partials     1395     1389       -6     

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 9a2b574...04b2562. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

{begin: "c", options: config.GetOptions{Revision: int(firstRev) + 3}, wantResponse: &clientv3.GetResponse{Header: createHeader(firstRev + 7), Count: 1, Kvs: []*mvccpb.KeyValue{kvCV2}}},
{begin: "c", options: config.GetOptions{Revision: int(firstRev) + 4}, wantResponse: &clientv3.GetResponse{Header: createHeader(firstRev + 7), Count: 1, Kvs: []*mvccpb.KeyValue{kvC}}},
{begin: "c", wantResponse: &clientv3.GetResponse{Header: createHeader(firstRev + 7), Count: 1, Kvs: []*mvccpb.KeyValue{kvC}}},
{begin: "", options: config.GetOptions{Prefix: true, MinModRevision: int(firstRev) + 2, MaxModRevision: int(firstRev) + 6}, wantResponse: &clientv3.GetResponse{Header: createHeader(firstRev + 7), Count: 6, Kvs: []*mvccpb.KeyValue{kvC, kvFoo, kvFooAbc}}},
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you set and evaluate min/max create/mod revision individually? Also please add some sorting

{begin: "c", options: config.GetOptions{Revision: int(firstRev) + 4}, wantResponse: &clientv3.GetResponse{Header: createHeader(firstRev + 7), Count: 1, Kvs: []*mvccpb.KeyValue{kvC}}},
{begin: "c", wantResponse: &clientv3.GetResponse{Header: createHeader(firstRev + 7), Count: 1, Kvs: []*mvccpb.KeyValue{kvC}}},
{begin: "", options: config.GetOptions{Prefix: true, MinModRevision: int(firstRev) + 2, MaxModRevision: int(firstRev) + 6}, wantResponse: &clientv3.GetResponse{Header: createHeader(firstRev + 7), Count: 6, Kvs: []*mvccpb.KeyValue{kvC, kvFoo, kvFooAbc}}},
{begin: "", options: config.GetOptions{Prefix: true, MinModRevision: int(firstRev), MaxModRevision: int(firstRev) + 7}, wantResponse: &clientv3.GetResponse{Header: createHeader(firstRev + 7), Count: 6, Kvs: allKvs}},
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you maybe add description to each scenario?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yep, I added the description for the existing test cases with #21187. Once that's ok and merged, I'll update the tests introduced in this PR accordingly.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

PR needs rebase.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants