wip(eap): http response rate function #85662
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
the
Scope: Backend
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is ✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #85662 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 42.22% 87.89% +45.67%
===========================================
Files 9665 9695 +30
Lines 548129 549723 +1594
Branches 21345 21345
===========================================
+ Hits 231453 483190 +251737
+ Misses 316366 66223 -250143
Partials 310 310 |
| if function in self.definitions.functions: | ||
| function_definition = self.definitions.functions[function] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In a future refactor, we can rename self.definitions.functions to self.definitions.aggregates
|
@wmak I addressed your comments! Lmk if that works for you! |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| @dataclass | ||
| class FormulaDefinition: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we have this inherit from FunctionDefinition so we're not repeating everything?
| @@ -324,7 +327,7 @@ def resolve_virtual_context_term( | |||
| self, | |||
| term: str, | |||
| raw_value: str | list[str], | |||
| resolved_column: ResolvedColumn, | |||
| resolved_column: ResolvedColumn | ResolvedFormula | ResolvedFormula, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this intentional? VCCs should only apply to Resolved Columns
| @@ -468,7 +471,7 @@ def resolve_aggregate_term( | |||
|
|
|||
| def _resolve_search_value( | |||
| self, | |||
| column: ResolvedColumn, | |||
| column: ResolvedColumn | ResolvedFormula, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Another one, is this intentional? We don't resolve search values for formulas do we?
| @@ -386,6 +402,65 @@ def count_processor(count_value: int | None) -> int: | |||
| return count_value | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| def http_response_rate(arg: str) -> Column.BinaryFormula: | |||
|
|
|||
| if not arg.isdigit(): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: why not just check that arg is in a list of the strings of 1-5, then you can cast safely without concern?
| op=ComparisonFilter.OP_IN, | ||
| value=AttributeValue( | ||
| val_str_array=StrArray( | ||
| values=response_codes, # |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| values=response_codes, # | |
| values=response_codes, |
| ArgumentDefinition( | ||
| argument_types={ | ||
| "string" | ||
| }, # TODO - this should be an integer, but `resolve_attribute` returns a string |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think instead of leaving this as a todo we need to add a way to define arguments that aren't just attributes, so that SearchResolver.resolve_aggregate knows to cast a user input, which probably would clean up the definition of http_response_rate for you too
👍 thanks for the review, I don't mind spending some more time getting the args working properly in this PR |
Work for #81750
http_response_ratefunction, which is used in insights