-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 360
test: migrate tap to mocha #7135
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
Conversation
Overall package sizeSelf size: 4.37 MB Dependency sizes| name | version | self size | total size | |------|---------|-----------|------------| | import-in-the-middle | 2.0.0 | 68.46 kB | 797.03 kB | | dc-polyfill | 0.1.10 | 26.73 kB | 26.73 kB |🤖 This report was automatically generated by heaviest-objects-in-the-universe |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #7135 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 84.53% 84.51% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 526 527 +1
Lines 22534 22538 +4
==========================================
Hits 19048 19048
- Misses 3486 3490 +4 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
59a8f70 to
6e5bb26
Compare
BenchmarksBenchmark execution time: 2026-01-07 18:33:51 Comparing candidate commit 75b81bd in PR branch Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 292 metrics, 28 unstable metrics. |
475265f to
93fdaec
Compare
|
tlhunter
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As mentioned elsewhere my preference for test suites is:
all node:test > all tap > all mocha > tap + mocha
So I would consider this PR an improvement to what we have today even if it's not in the direction I would ultimately prefer.
packages/dd-trace/test/ci-visibility/exporters/ci-visibility-exporter.spec.js
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
Forgot to mention in my review that this PR should also update the |
watson
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've reviewed everything except the new scripts in scripts folder for running the mocha tests in parallel. I don't have the bandwith to review those now, but I think as long as we can verify that all the tests are running and that if a single test is failing, it fails the job, then I'm happy with this getting merged.
This tries to align with the former behavior as close as possible. This is for example the case by using more parallel threads, even if the CPU has less cores.
This is adding a script to run multiple mocha test files in parallel in their own child process instead of using mocha's own parallel mode that is using a pool instead of child processes.
d3943c3 to
1ecd1d2
Compare
This tries to align with the former behavior as close as possible. This is for example the case by using more parallel threads, even if the CPU has less cores.