ScheduledMerges: also test nested unions and arbitrary configs#814
Open
ScheduledMerges: also test nested unions and arbitrary configs#814
Conversation
458fbf9 to
dabce7d
Compare
mheinzel
commented
Feb 16, 2026
|
|
||
| -- | For simplicity, this is not a recursive structure. We just nest once, or | ||
| -- not at all if there is just a single 'UnionInput'. | ||
| type NestedUnionInput = QC.NonEmptyList UnionInput |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It could cover even more corner cases if we also made some inserts to the child unions before unioning them again (so they have regular levels in addtiion to the union level). Wouldn't be terribly complicated, but I wasn't sure whether it's worth it, since we still have the lockstep tests.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
We had already noted that testing nested unions (unions of tables that are themselves result of a union) would be a good idea. Also, after making some LSM parameters configurable in #716, it seems sensible to test more than just the default values.
As a preparation for further changes to the prototype, this PR addresses these points and makes small improvements to the invariants and properties we assert.