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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Issue 36: increase test coverage of validation.py #68

Merged
merged 77 commits into from
Nov 14, 2024
Merged

Issue 36: increase test coverage of validation.py #68

merged 77 commits into from
Nov 14, 2024

Conversation

SSchotten
Copy link
Collaborator

@SSchotten SSchotten commented Nov 2, 2024 •
edited
Loading

  • Rename df_checker.py -> validation.py
  • Move filter_validation_dict_by_table_name to validation_input.py
  • Separated validation logic into a ValidationSettings dataclass (containing the user input) and a ValidationRunner class (containing the actual calls to GX)
  • Increased coverage of test_validation.py to 100% (Note: a number of functions/methods using GX logic only were exempted from coverage/testing. 😁 So take '100% coverage' here with a pinch of salt.
    • Increasing to an actual 100% coverage is still a TODO, and would require mocking large parts of the validation logic.
  • Modified tests/test_data/dq_rules.json
  • Turned some attributes into private ones, renamed some attributes/variables, and other minor changes.

@SSchotten SSchotten linked an issue Nov 2, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
Increase test coverage of df_checker.py to 95% #36
Closed
bas added 24 commits November 4, 2024 00:31
Move a bunch of GX data_context method calls to ValidationSettings.cr…
d9cb358 
…eate_batch_definition
Start implementing TestGetOrAddValidationDefinition, mock create_batc…
667c121 
…h_definition call
Make sure create_batch_definition only initialise_or_update_attribute…
e158bd8 
…s when necessary
Stop printing of expectation suite
9c4a1ea
Simplify get_or_add_validation_definition, move parts to ValidationSe…
6c9adca 
…ttings
Add some todos
e1d3888
Remove dataclass decorator
250b1b1
Fix initialisation of ValidationSettings
c1d9bb5
Add another todo
59f684e
Refactor more logic into ValidationSettings.create_validation_definition
a5cfdfb
Formatting
8f3f602
Remove get_or_add_validation_definition and test_get_or_add_validatio…
eb73888 
…n_definition
Separate into ValidationSettings dataclass and ValidationRunner class
100f6a8
Formatting
3750569
Refactor some functions to only use ValidationRunner instance
bf721ed
Separate call to _set_data_context during init
46f86c4
Fix some imports
9682bd0
Add TestValidationRunner
8502cb1
Formatting
a33d596
Pull action_list into ValidationRunner
6b53b15
Re-add __post_init__ to ValidationSettings
6a32871
Add post-init checks
ac19714
Make name derived variables private
00671c0
Fix post-init checks
cdb210f
@SSchotten SSchotten marked this pull request as ready for review November 11, 2024 13:24
@ArthurKordes ArthurKordes merged commit d5e12e3 into main Nov 14, 2024
3 checks passed
@ArthurKordes ArthurKordes deleted the issue/36-validation-coverage branch November 14, 2024 14:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ArthurKordes ArthurKordes ArthurKordes approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Increase test coverage of df_checker.py to 95%
2 participants
@SSchotten @ArthurKordes