RE: [Automated-testing] KCIDB: Support non-binary test outputs V3

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Nikolai Kondrashov
> On 8/16/24 1:03 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> > On 8/5/24 2:28 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> >>> I'll follow up with a separate message for each of the changes, going over the
> >>> details and the rationale.
> >>
> >> The support for non-binary test outputs introduces a new field to the "test"
> >> objects called "value", being an "object" itself. It (and its abstract
> >> meaning) are supposed to work together with the "status" field. That is, it
> >> should only be considered when the test has actually executed. I.e. with a
> >> "FAIL", "ERROR", "PASS", or "DONE" status only. Normally "DONE" should be
> >> used, when the value is the test's output, and not an auxiliary value.
> >
> > Alright, I redid support for non-binary test outputs:
> >
> > https://github.com/kernelci/kcidb-io/pull/85/commits/040a20db407f2592c28c3797cec9e4118221af9c
> 
> Aaand, redone again:
> 
> https://github.com/kernelci/kcidb-io/pull/85/commits/86b75f6bf6e4f74e594a301382f2b77cfe4cbbd9
> 
> I switched the value from integer to floating-point, as that allows us to get
> rid of the exponent field, at the cost of a small accuracy loss. The storage
> requirements are still 64 bits.
> 
> These values are intended for analysis and tracking first of all, and small
> inaccuracy would have little effect on them. If you want to store the exact
> measured value, you can put it into the "misc" field.
> 
> OTOH, this makes it much easier and faster to run queries on the values.
> 
> Here's the new (abbreviated schema):
> 
>     "number": {
>         "type": "object",
>         "properties": {
>             "value": {"type": "number"},
>             "unit": {"type": "string"},
>             "prefix": {
>                 "type": "string",
>                 "enum": ["metric", "binary"],

What is the purpose of the metric/binary enum?  Is it to disambiguate the meaning
of K and M in unit prefixes?  Is it only for display?

>             },
>         },
>         "required": ["value"],
>         "additionalProperties": False,
>     }
> 
> And the rewritten examples:
> 
>     "value": 42,
>     # Display: 42
> 
>     "value": 3.14159,
>     # Display: 3.14159
> 
>     "value": 720,
>     "unit": "KB",
>     # Display: 720 KB
> 
>     "value": 145000,
>     "prefix": "metric"
>     # Display: 145 K
> 
>     "value": 1.6e-7,
>     "unit": "s",
>     "prefix": "metric",
>     # Display: 160 ns
> 
>     "value": 5.12e5,
>     "unit": "B",
>     "prefix": "binary",
>     # Display: 500 KiB


Looks good to me!!
 -- Tim