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

Two small fixes #424

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 5, 2024
Merged

Two small fixes #424

merged 2 commits into from
Jan 5, 2024

Conversation

nweires
Copy link
Collaborator

@nweires nweires commented Dec 11, 2023

Fixes two small issues from #422

Pull Request Description

  • Removes a stray comma
  • Pass bucket/prefix as a single param (changed this in the test, but not aws.py)

Checklist

Not all may apply

  • Code changes (must work)
  • Tests exercising your feature/bug fix (check coverage report on Checks -> BuildStockBatch Tests -> Artifacts)
  • Coverage has increased or at least not decreased. Update minimum_coverage in .github/workflows/coverage.yml as necessary.
  • All other unit and integration tests passing
  • Update validation for project config yaml file changes
  • Update existing documentation
  • Run a small batch run on Kestrel/Eagle to make sure it all works if you made changes that will affect Kestrel/Eagle
  • Add to the changelog_dev.rst file and propose migration text in the pull request

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 11, 2023

File Coverage
All files 86%
base.py 90%
exc.py 57%
hpc.py 78%
local.py 70%
postprocessing.py 84%
utils.py 91%
cloud/docker_base.py 92%
sampler/base.py 79%
sampler/downselect.py 33%
sampler/precomputed.py 93%
sampler/residential_quota.py 61%
test/shared_testing_stuff.py 85%
test/test_docker.py 33%
test/test_validation.py 97%
workflow_generator/base.py 90%
workflow_generator/commercial.py 53%
workflow_generator/residential_hpxml.py 86%

Minimum allowed coverage is 33%

Generated by 🐒 cobertura-action against 1b60710

Copy link
Member

@nmerket nmerket left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One question.

cls.run_simulations(cfg, jobs_d, job_id, sim_dir, S3FileSystem(), bucket, prefix)
cls.run_simulations(cfg, jobs_d, job_id, sim_dir, S3FileSystem(), f"{bucket}/{prefix}")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I see that in the run_simulations function definition there's just an output_path argument. Does that mean this wasn't already working?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I changed the function params in response to this comment, but missed updating this line.

Meanwhile, I'm also looking into why the test didn't catch this.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added some comments to test_docker_base.py to at least explain why the test there won't catch issues like the one in docker_base.py.

We should try to get that test to test things more thoroughly, but that's more involved so I'll save it for a separate PR.

@nmerket nmerket merged commit 3cbb673 into NREL:develop Jan 5, 2024
5 checks passed
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.

2 participants