Re: KCIDB: Support non-binary test outputs

Mark Brown <[email protected]> Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:32:46 +0100

Newsgroups	dev.linux.lists.kernelci
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 05:26:52PM +0300, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> On 8/5/24 3:33 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 02:28:24PM +0300, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:

> > Might it be useful to directly specify units for use with "number" to
> > help with normalising data between different CI systems or hardware -

> This is a totally valid concern. We could add a "units" field, e.g. beside
> "value". However, I'm not sure how we could use it. Sure, we can put them next
> to the value in the dashboard, which would look nice, but then we can also put
> them into the "comment", as my examples do, and I'm not sure if we would be
> able to do much with them in the database.

> Even if we have the exponent separate, I'm not sure we can make use of it
> (converting units on the fly won't work well with indices). I mean, we can
> (and should) compare only values with the same unit, but which one, if we have
> multiple? Both separately?

> On the one hand I like having the explicit unit, on the other hand we can get
> a similar result with simply using different test names for different units,
> and have them specified in the comments, for humans 🤔

Just thinking out loud here but perhaps what we want is something in the
ingestion path which either validates a schema that says "Test X must
have unit Y" or normalises the units on the way in.  I think my concern
is more on the write side than on the read side (modulo the display
stuff), or rather making sure that what's available to the read side can
be joined up.

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 488 B)