Add parsing methods for Percentiles aggregations #24183
Conversation
javanna
left a comment
javanna
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
left a couple of minors, LGTM otherwise
|
|
||
| Aggregation parsedAggregation; | ||
| try (XContentParser parser = xContentType.xContent().createParser(xContentRegistry, originalBytes)) { | ||
| try (XContentParser parser = xContentType.xContent().createParser(xContentRegistry(), originalBytes)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
createParser from the base test class?
| assertIterators(aggregation, parse(aggregation, randomFrom(XContentType.values()), randomBoolean(), false)); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private void assertIterators(Iterable<Percentile> aggregation, Iterable<Percentile> parsedAggregation) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd also merge it with the testPercentilesIterators() method if this is the only place where it is used.
|
|
||
| private double[] percents; | ||
| private boolean keyed; | ||
| private DocValueFormat docValueFormat; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason these three fields need to be test instance members be randomized in the init() method? Otherwise I would prfer making them local in createTestIntstance().
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When reducing percentiles aggregations it is important that all reduced aggregations have the same set of percentiles otherwise the reduce phase will just fail. Before adding the parsing method, the test used a fixed 0.5 percent but I think it's better to have one or more randomized percentiles.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And I find it more rationale that all aggregations have the same format and keyed too, because it shouldn't be different from one or the other during the aggregation reducing phase.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, that makes sense. I didn't think about the reducing tests.
| for (int i = 0; i < numValues; ++i) { | ||
| values[i] = randomDouble(); | ||
| } | ||
| return createTestInstance(name, pipelineAggregators, metaData, keyed, docValueFormat, percents, values); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd prefer percents/keyed/docValueFormat to be declared and instantiated here if there is no other reason I am missing atm.
| assertIterators(aggregation, parse(aggregation, randomFrom(XContentType.values()), randomBoolean(), false)); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private void assertIterators(Iterable<Percentile> aggregation, Iterable<Percentile> parsedAggregation) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd also merge it with the testPercentilesIterators() method if this is the only place where it is used.
| return new InternalHDRPercentileRanks(name, cdfValues, state, keyed, format, aggregators, metadata); | ||
| boolean keyed, DocValueFormat format, double[] percents, double[] values) { | ||
| final DoubleHistogram state = new DoubleHistogram(3); | ||
| Arrays.stream(values).forEach(state::recordValue); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was trying to understand why this step got necessary, can you briefly explain? I'm just curious what happens here since it didn't happen in the test before.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That was a mistake, now it is fixed.
|
Thanks a lot @javanna @cbuescher ! |
3 participants
Note: pull request against feature branch
This pull request adds the parsing methods for
InternalHDRPercentilesandInternalTDigestPercentilesaggregations. Parsing code is straightforward because it uses the ParsedPercentiles class created in #23974 for percentiles ranks aggregations.Most of the changes are in test classes where code has been mutualized between classes.