[Ingest pipelines] Tests for pipeline debugging enhancement #75606
Conversation
alisonelizabeth
added
v8.0.0
Team:Kibana Management
alisonelizabeth
force-pushed
the
ingest_pipelines/tests
branch
from
53604c8 to
a86dd6f
Compare
alisonelizabeth
force-pushed
the
ingest_pipelines/tests
branch
from
206de7c to
a50d115
Compare
|
@elasticmachine merge upstream |
alisonelizabeth
changed the title
|
Pinging @elastic/es-ui (Team:Elasticsearch UI) |
|
cc @cuff-links |
|
@elasticmachine merge upstream |
|
@elasticmachine merge upstream |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great work @alisonelizabeth ! Very well written tests. I left a comment about mocking uuid, not sure if that would simplify things of make it more complex. I let you decide.
| // Initialize mock services | ||
| uiMetricService.setup(usageCollectionPluginMock.createSetupContract()); | ||
| // @ts-ignore | ||
| apiService.setup(mockHttpClient, uiMetricService); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is strange to have this setup call and the one above inside the initHttpRequests as it is not related.
In other places we have a setupEnvironement() where we setup the services and call the initHttpRequests. Do you mind keeping it consistent?
| <KibanaContextProvider services={appServices}> | ||
| <ProcessorsEditorContextProvider {...props}> | ||
| <TestPipelineActions /> | ||
| <ProcessorsEditor /> <GlobalOnFailureProcessorsEditor /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: maybe the <GlobalOnFailureProcessorsEditor /> on the next line for readability?
| // this is generated dynamically and not something we can stub. | ||
| // As a workaround, the value is added as a data attribute in the UI | ||
| // and we retrieve it to generate the mocked output. | ||
| const addProcessorTagtoMockOutput = (output: VerboseTestOutput) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess that another way would have been to mock the v4() method of the uuid package and return a sequential id. So if there are 5 processors, their id would be 0, 1, 2, 3, 4.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point. I'm going to leave this as-is for now, but will consider refactoring it as I add more tests.
💚 Build SucceededBuild metricsasync chunks size
History
To update your PR or re-run it, just comment with: |
This PR adds test coverage for the work implemented via #74964.