Skip to content

[ML] Remove error on parsing progress for unknown phase in DFA #55926

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

dimitris-athanasiou
Copy link
Contributor

On second thought, this check does not seem to be adding value.
We can test that the phases are as we expect them for each analysis
by adding yaml tests. Those would fail if we introduce new phases
from c++ accidentally or without coordination. This would achieve
the same thing. At the same time we would not have to comment out
this code each time a new phase is introduced. Instead we can just
temporarily mute those yaml tests. Note I will add those tests
right after the imminent new phases are added to the c++ side.

On second thought, this check does not seem to be adding value.
We can test that the phases are as we expect them for each analysis
by adding yaml tests. Those would fail if we introduce new phases
from c++ accidentally or without coordination. This would achieve
the same thing. At the same time we would not have to comment out
this code each time a new phase is introduced. Instead we can just
temporarily mute those yaml tests. Note I will add those tests
right after the imminent new phases are added to the c++ side.
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/ml-core (:ml)

Copy link
Contributor

@droberts195 droberts195 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@dimitris-athanasiou dimitris-athanasiou merged commit 22b36ea into elastic:master Apr 29, 2020
@dimitris-athanasiou dimitris-athanasiou deleted the remove-error-on-unknown-phase branch April 29, 2020 16:27
dimitris-athanasiou added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 29, 2020
…55926) (#55954)

On second thought, this check does not seem to be adding value.
We can test that the phases are as we expect them for each analysis
by adding yaml tests. Those would fail if we introduce new phases
from c++ accidentally or without coordination. This would achieve
the same thing. At the same time we would not have to comment out
this code each time a new phase is introduced. Instead we can just
temporarily mute those yaml tests. Note I will add those tests
right after the imminent new phases are added to the c++ side.

Backport of #55926
Copy link
Contributor

@przemekwitek przemekwitek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants