Skip to content

Conversation

@losipiuk
Copy link
Member

@losipiuk losipiuk commented Oct 23, 2025

Add some missing test coverage

Summary by Sourcery

Tests:

  • Add test for canStream over a union operator with multiple child sources

@losipiuk losipiuk added the no-release-notes This pull request does not require release notes entry label Oct 23, 2025
@cla-bot cla-bot bot added the cla-signed label Oct 23, 2025
@sourcery-ai
Copy link

sourcery-ai bot commented Oct 23, 2025

Reviewer's Guide

Add missing test coverage for top-level UNION in SchedulingUtils by implementing a new test method that verifies canStream behavior for each branch of a UNION stage.

File-Level Changes

Change Details Files
Introduce testCanStreamUnion to verify streaming through a UNION operator.
  • Define separate SubPlans and RemoteSourceNodes for branches a, b, c
  • Construct a parent SubPlan with a UNION node referencing the branch sources
  • Assert that SchedulingUtils.canStream returns true for each branch
core/trino-main/src/test/java/io/trino/execution/scheduler/TestSchedulingUtils.java

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

  • Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
  • Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
  • Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
    issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
    review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
  • Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
    request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
    @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
  • Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
    the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
    want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
    (re-)generate the summary at any time.
  • Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
    request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
  • Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
    pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
    addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
  • Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
    request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
    want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
    @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

  • Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
    summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
  • Change the review language.
  • Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
  • Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

Copy link

@sourcery-ai sourcery-ai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hey there - I've reviewed your changes - here's some feedback:

  • In testCanStreamUnion you forgot to include cSubPlan in the createSubPlan children list, so you should pass ImmutableList.of(aSubPlan, bSubPlan, cSubPlan) instead of just a and b.
  • Consider adding a negative test where one union child cannot stream so you assert that canStream(parent, child) returns false when any branch is non‐streamable.
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:

## Overall Comments
- In testCanStreamUnion you forgot to include cSubPlan in the createSubPlan children list, so you should pass ImmutableList.of(aSubPlan, bSubPlan, cSubPlan) instead of just a and b.
- Consider adding a negative test where one union child cannot stream so you assert that canStream(parent, child) returns false when any branch is non‐streamable.

## Individual Comments

### Comment 1
<location> `core/trino-main/src/test/java/io/trino/execution/scheduler/TestSchedulingUtils.java:93-96` </location>
<code_context>
+        SubPlan cSubPlan = valuesSubPlan("c");
+        RemoteSourceNode remoteSourceC = remoteSource("c");
+
+        SubPlan parentSubPlan = createSubPlan(
+                "parent",
+                union("union", ImmutableList.of(remoteSourceA, remoteSourceB, remoteSourceC)),
+                ImmutableList.of(aSubPlan, bSubPlan));
+
+        assertThat(SchedulingUtils.canStream(parentSubPlan, aSubPlan)).isTrue();
</code_context>

<issue_to_address>
**question (testing):** Check if all union children are included in parentSubPlan's children.

Please verify that cSubPlan is either intentionally excluded or properly accounted for; otherwise, the test may not represent the union's full structure.
</issue_to_address>

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.

Comment on lines +93 to +96
SubPlan parentSubPlan = createSubPlan(
"parent",
union("union", ImmutableList.of(remoteSourceA, remoteSourceB, remoteSourceC)),
ImmutableList.of(aSubPlan, bSubPlan));
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

question (testing): Check if all union children are included in parentSubPlan's children.

Please verify that cSubPlan is either intentionally excluded or properly accounted for; otherwise, the test may not represent the union's full structure.

SubPlan parentSubPlan = createSubPlan(
"parent",
union("union", ImmutableList.of(remoteSourceA, remoteSourceB, remoteSourceC)),
ImmutableList.of(aSubPlan, bSubPlan));
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why cSubPlan isn't a child of "parent"?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

cla-signed no-release-notes This pull request does not require release notes entry

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants