Skip to content

Conversation

@carlesonielfa
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Had some issues importing a KB from hosted to standalone, this fixes it.

Another approach might be to remove these fields at export time, but then that exported fields wouldn't match those defined here:

class SemanticConfig(BaseModel):

How was this PR tested?

Describe how you tested this PR.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 15, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.53%. Comparing base (f612bd3) to head (c55416f).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2778      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   87.13%   82.53%   -4.60%     
==========================================
  Files         386      386              
  Lines       24293    24295       +2     
==========================================
- Hits        21167    20053    -1114     
- Misses       3126     4242    +1116     
Flag Coverage Δ
nucliadb 65.43% <100.00%> (-9.49%) ⬇️
nucliadb-ingest 40.81% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
nucliadb-reader 42.99% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
nucliadb-search 43.70% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
nucliadb-standalone 47.59% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
nucliadb-train 45.75% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
nucliadb-writer 46.26% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
nucliadb_dataset 55.45% <ø> (ø)
nucliadb_models 85.81% <ø> (ø)
nucliadb_sdk 80.11% <ø> (ø)
nucliadb_sidecar 89.03% <ø> (ø)
nucliadb_telemetry 86.56% <ø> (ø)
nucliadb_utils 83.77% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

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.

3 participants