Conversation
staudtMarius
added
enhancement
# Conflicts: # CHANGELOG.md
# Conflicts: # CHANGELOG.md
sebastian-peter
left a comment
sebastian-peter
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks great overall, this really simplifies things.
I have two small additional todos:
- Could you please adapt the relevant UML diagrams in
docs/uml/? At leastTimeSeriesDatamodelConcept.puml, maybe more, need adaption - Please have a look into the SonarQube issues
src/main/java/edu/ie3/datamodel/io/factory/timeseries/BdewLoadProfileFactory.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| SystemParticipantTestData.loadInput.copy().loadprofile(createInvalidStandardLoadProfile("h1")).build() || 1 || new InvalidEntityException("Load profile must contain at least one valid entry: h0, g[0-6], l[0-2], ep1, ez2, random, or LoadProfile#NO_LOAD_PROFILE.", invalidLoad) | ||
| SystemParticipantTestData.loadInput.copy().loadprofile(createInvalidStandardLoadProfile("g7")).build() || 1 || new InvalidEntityException("Load profile must contain at least one valid entry: h0, g[0-6], l[0-2], ep1, ez2, random, or LoadProfile#NO_LOAD_PROFILE.", invalidLoad) | ||
| SystemParticipantTestData.loadInput.copy().loadprofile(createInvalidStandardLoadProfile("l3")).build() || 1 || new InvalidEntityException("Load profile must contain at least one valid entry: h0, g[0-6], l[0-2], ep1, ez2, random, or LoadProfile#NO_LOAD_PROFILE.", invalidLoad) | ||
| SystemParticipantTestData.loadInput.copy().loadprofile(createInvalidStandardLoadProfile("invalid")).build() || 1 || new InvalidEntityException("Load profile must contain at least one valid entry: h0, g[0-6], l[0-2], ep1, ez2, random, or LoadProfile#NO_LOAD_PROFILE.", invalidLoad) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would be great if you could test these in PowerProfileKeyTest
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't see the need to test this, since we are no longer using the profile in the model. The key can contain a key that is not part of the standard load profiles that are defined in the PSDM. But this behavior is intended.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, because we're not matching the keys against static profiles anymore, right? Maybe we should provide a method to do so, at least to get a mapping PowerProfileKey -> Optional<LoadProfile>, and if it's none we have to check for custom profiles?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure anymore what the latest state of our discussion was...
2 participants
Resolves #1514