round the actual coverage to 2 decimal pieces #400
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Some time the monitor raises issues if the coverage is slightly less than the desired which if rounded to 2 decimal places makes it fine. This PR fixes that issue Example ```The following items did not meet field coverage rules: dict/booking_link (expected 0.08, got 0.07997638758000722) dict/domain (expected 0.62, got 0.5835189512442064) dict/hotel_details (expected 0.01, got 0.007963674008471044) dict/location_summary (expected 0.01, got 0.009283902565485929) dict/opening_hours (expected 0.6, got 0.5595103926177906) dict/phone (expected 0.84, got 0.8263806609375602) dict/review_count_by_star (expected 0.99, got 0.6119096457086003) dict/website (expected 0.62, got 0.5835189512442064)``` the validation for `dict/opening_hours` could be skipped as the expected is slightly less than actual which if rounded should not raise any error
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #400 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 76.54% 76.54%
=======================================
Files 76 76
Lines 3214 3214
Branches 384 384
=======================================
Hits 2460 2460
Misses 683 683
Partials 71 71
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
VMRuiz
reviewed
Jun 13, 2023
| @@ -459,8 +459,8 @@ def test_check_if_field_coverage_rules_are_met(self): | |||
| "SPIDERMON_FIELD_COVERAGE_RULES" | |||
| ) | |||
| for field, expected_coverage in field_coverage_rules.items(): | |||
| actual_coverage = self.data.stats.get( | |||
| f"spidermon_field_coverage/{field}", 0 | |||
| actual_coverage = round( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alternatively, to avoid rounding we can change the comparation with:
if actual_coverage > expected_coverage or math.isclose(actual_coverage, expected_coverage, abs_tol=threshold) :
continue
else:
failure.append(In any case, the margin of error should be configurable, and the default configuration should be do nothing as compared to the current implementation. Otherwise, this would break backward compatibility and should be clearly warned
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Sometimes the monitor raises issues if the coverage is slightly less than the desired which if rounded to 2 decimal places makes it fine. This PR fixes that issue
Example
the validation for
dict/booking_link,dict/hotel_details,dict/location_summaryanddict/opening_hourscould be skipped as the expected is slightly less than the actual which if rounded should not raise the error.