Skip to content

Conversation

@kevinmessiaen
Copy link
Member

@kevinmessiaen kevinmessiaen commented Jun 22, 2023

Description

  • Fixed issue where it's not clear whenever the test are rerun in the catalog
  • Added loading spinner
  • Added possibility to run test on whole dataset

Type of Change

  • 📚 Examples / docs / tutorials / dependencies update
  • 🔧 Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • 🥂 Improvement (non-breaking change which improves an existing feature)
  • 🚀 New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • 🔐 Security fix

@linear
Copy link

linear bot commented Jun 22, 2023

GSK-1335 Bug with re-execution of test

notebook: https://github.com/Giskard-AI/giskard/blob/feature/debug_output/python-client/docs/reference/notebooks/ieee_fraud_detection_adversarial_validation.ipynb

branch: feature/debug_output

description: I find new bug. IfI want to re-run the test with the same or new parameters, without updating a page, I cannot get result message. In the terminal I see, that the test is executed, but no result is shown:

Screenshot 2023-06-20 at 17.29.34.png

@kevinmessiaen kevinmessiaen changed the title Test re-execution result not clear 1264 - Test re-execution result not clear Jun 26, 2023
@kevinmessiaen kevinmessiaen changed the title 1264 - Test re-execution result not clear GSK-1335 - Test re-execution result not clear Jun 26, 2023
@kevinmessiaen kevinmessiaen changed the title GSK-1335 - Test re-execution result not clear GSK-1335 & GSK-1264 - Test re-execution result not clear Jun 26, 2023
@linear
Copy link

linear bot commented Jun 26, 2023

@kevinmessiaen kevinmessiaen changed the title GSK-1335 & GSK-1264 - Test re-execution result not clear GSK-1335 & GSK-1264 & GSK-1255 - Test re-execution result not clear Jun 26, 2023
@linear
Copy link

linear bot commented Jun 26, 2023

GSK-1255 Add the possibility to run tests on whole dataset from catalog

Currently we run test from catalog on dataset sample, we want to have a dropdown menu to run on whole dataset (as in test suite execution modal)

@rabah-khalek rabah-khalek self-requested a review July 7, 2023 13:28
Copy link
Contributor

@rabah-khalek rabah-khalek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I haven't checked the code, but I have tested it, and it does exactly what it says on the tin.

Comment on lines 467 to 473
async getCatalog(projectId: number) {
return apiV2.get<unknown, CatalogDTO>(`/catalog`, {
params: {
projectId,
},
projectId
}
});
},
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why don't we use projectId as a path param?

Copy link
Member Author

@kevinmessiaen kevinmessiaen Jul 12, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's true that it also can be a path variable in this case. I think it was set as a filter to show the data associated to the project but now that all catalog items will be linked to projects it make more sense to use a path variable.

Let me change it in #1175 since it's a PR that heavily refacto the catalog

@henchaves henchaves self-requested a review July 12, 2023 14:05
@kevinmessiaen kevinmessiaen merged commit eb06f1a into main Jul 13, 2023
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
No Duplication information No Duplication information

@Hartorn Hartorn deleted the feature/gsk-1335-bug-with-re-execution-of-test branch September 13, 2023 11:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants