surekhasaharan commented on pull request #9717:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/9717#issuecomment-652089695
@himanshug While we are improving the usability of code coverage checks, it
seems this PR is still failing with the more lenient checks.
```
Diff coverage statistics:
surekhasaharan commented on pull request #9717:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/9717#issuecomment-641453817
@himanshug could you try to merge master, it seems
https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/9969 was merged to help with code coverage
check failures.
---
surekhasaharan commented on pull request #9717:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/9717#issuecomment-637206061
> @surekhasaharan thanks for checking.
> yeah, I noticed that we recently added code coverage expectation to
builds. changes here is mostly updating existing code and new
surekhasaharan commented on pull request #9717:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/9717#issuecomment-637191104
LGTM, thanks @himanshug
Though it seems CI is failing because of code coverage
```
ERROR: Insufficient line coverage of 20% (10/50). Required 65%.
ERROR: Insuffi
surekhasaharan commented on pull request #9717:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/9717#issuecomment-625547726
Thank you @himanshug for raising this PR, I'll take a look soon(this week or
next).
This is an automated m