Skip to content

Conversation

@laureanobrs
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@wfa-reviewable
Copy link

This change is Reviewable

@laureanobrs laureanobrs force-pushed the laureanobrs-update-docs branch from cf03c5f to 3bb6fd9 Compare December 17, 2025 18:24
@laureanobrs laureanobrs marked this pull request as ready for review December 17, 2025 18:25
Copy link
Member

@SanjayVas SanjayVas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@SanjayVas reviewed 2 files and made 1 comment.
Reviewable status: 2 of 3 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @laureanobrs).


src/main/k8s/local/README.md line 298 at r1 (raw file):

## Running the Correctness Test

*Note*: currently the assertions in this test fail when running it in a local environment because the [test expects a large population](https://github.com/world-federation-of-advertisers/cross-media-measurement/blob/v0.5.29/src/test/kotlin/org/wfanet/measurement/integration/k8s/SyntheticGeneratorCorrectnessTest.kt#L99) and the local EDP simulators are [configured to use a small population](https://github.com/world-federation-of-advertisers/cross-media-measurement/blob/v0.5.29/src/main/k8s/local/edp_simulators.cue#L44). For the test to pass, it needs to be switched to population small.

nit: rephrase this to include clear instructions on what code changes to make to get the test to pass

Additional context would be that the local EDP simulators use a small population as single machines tend not to have enough memory to handle large populations. If they have enough RAM and are willing to wait longer for the test to run, they can technically swap the simulators to use the large pop instead of swapping the test to use the small one. We don't need to include instructions for that though :)

Copy link
Member

@SanjayVas SanjayVas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@SanjayVas reviewed 1 file and all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @laureanobrs).

@laureanobrs laureanobrs force-pushed the laureanobrs-update-docs branch from 53eca41 to 1953fb3 Compare December 19, 2025 15:07
Copy link
Contributor Author

@laureanobrs laureanobrs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@laureanobrs resolved 1 discussion.
Reviewable status: 2 of 3 files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @SanjayVas).

@laureanobrs laureanobrs force-pushed the laureanobrs-update-docs branch from 1953fb3 to 62ae61a Compare December 19, 2025 15:15
Copy link
Contributor Author

@laureanobrs laureanobrs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@laureanobrs reviewed 3 files and all commit messages.
Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @laureanobrs).

@laureanobrs laureanobrs merged commit 14cb3d6 into main Dec 19, 2025
5 checks passed
@laureanobrs laureanobrs deleted the laureanobrs-update-docs branch December 19, 2025 15:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants