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

add typing to aiokafka/coordinator/* #1006

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

dimastbk
Copy link
Contributor

@dimastbk dimastbk commented May 6, 2024

Changes

Fixes #

Checklist

  • I think the code is well written
  • Unit tests for the changes exist
  • Documentation reflects the changes
  • Add a new news fragment into the CHANGES folder
    • name it <issue_id>.<type> (e.g. 588.bugfix)
    • if you don't have an issue_id change it to the pr id after creating the PR
    • ensure type is one of the following:
      • .feature: Signifying a new feature.
      • .bugfix: Signifying a bug fix.
      • .doc: Signifying a documentation improvement.
      • .removal: Signifying a deprecation or removal of public API.
      • .misc: A ticket has been closed, but it is not of interest to users.
    • Make sure to use full sentences with correct case and punctuation, for example: Fix issue with non-ascii contents in doctest text files.

aiokafka/coordinator/assignors/abstract.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
aiokafka/coordinator/assignors/abstract.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
aiokafka/coordinator/assignors/sticky/sticky_assignor.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
aiokafka/coordinator/assignors/sticky/sticky_assignor.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -37,8 +51,9 @@ def metadata(self, topics):
MemberMetadata struct
"""

@classmethod
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(offtopic) Why is it class method? It's strange to have a shared state among all clients

aiokafka/coordinator/assignors/sticky/sticky_assignor.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 17, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.50655% with 8 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 52.94%. Comparing base (f9edd9e) to head (89d1535).

Files Patch % Lines
...ka/coordinator/assignors/sticky/sticky_assignor.py 94.93% 2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...iokafka/coordinator/assignors/sticky/sorted_set.py 85.00% 1 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
aiokafka/coordinator/assignors/roundrobin.py 90.90% 0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1006       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   95.04%   52.94%   -42.11%     
===========================================
  Files         114      114               
  Lines       16906    16970       +64     
  Branches     2759     2771       +12     
===========================================
- Hits        16068     8984     -7084     
- Misses        493     7677     +7184     
+ Partials      345      309       -36     
Flag Coverage Δ
cext 50.11% <96.50%> (-41.83%) ⬇️
integration ?
purepy 52.67% <96.50%> (-41.83%) ⬇️
unit 52.87% <96.50%> (+0.14%) ⬆️

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.

@@ -548,7 +552,8 @@ def _perform_reassignments(
)

if (
partition in self.previous_assignment
consumer is not None
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why this change here and below is needed?

aiokafka/consumer/fetcher.py Show resolved Hide resolved
aiokafka/coordinator/assignors/sticky/sticky_assignor.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
topics: Set[str],
topics_partitions: Optional[Set[int]] = None,
topic_partitions_lambda: Optional[Callable[[str], Optional[Set[int]]]] = None,
) -> MagicMock:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shouldn't we declare mocked type instead? Not sure whether this is correct though.

Makefile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
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.

None yet

2 participants