cshuo opened a new pull request, #19540:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hudi/pull/19540

   ### Describe the issue this Pull Request addresses
   
   Closes #19538.
   
   The Flink DAG builders and shared utilities lacked focused unit coverage for 
configuration, data types, serialization, time-wait behavior, compaction 
helpers, and operator graph assembly. This made regressions in these paths 
harder to detect without broader job-level tests.
   
   ### Summary and Changelog
   
   - Add direct unit tests for `Pipelines`, `HoodiePipeline`, `TimeWait`, 
`CoordinationResponseSerDe`, `StreamerUtil`, `CompactionUtil`, and 
`DataTypeUtils`.
   - Validate assembled pipeline graphs, including transformation names, 
parallelism, and bucket bulk-insert variants, without executing full Flink jobs.
   - Raise line coverage for every target class to at least 80%.
   
   Validation:
   
   `mvn -Punit-tests -pl hudi-flink-datasource/hudi-flink -am 
-Dtest=TestPipelines,TestTimeWait,TestCoordinationResponseSerDe,TestHoodiePipeline,TestDataTypeUtils,TestStreamerUtil,TestCompactionUtil
 -Dsurefire.failIfNoSpecifiedTests=false -DskipITs -DskipSparkTests 
-DskipScalaTests test`
   
   59 tests passed with no failures or errors.
   
   ### Impact
   
   Test-only change. There are no public API, configuration, runtime behavior, 
or performance changes.
   
   ### Risk Level
   
   None. Production sources are unchanged, and all targeted unit tests pass.
   
   ### Documentation Update
   
   None.
   
   ### Contributor's checklist
   
   - [ ] Read through [contributor's 
guide](https://hudi.apache.org/contribute/how-to-contribute)
   - [x] Enough context is provided in the sections above
   - [x] Adequate tests were added if applicable
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to