Skip to content

Determine active nodes in verdi calculation list based on process state#1873

Merged
sphuber merged 1 commit into
aiidateam:developfrom
sphuber:fix_1817_verdi_calculation_list_active_criterion
Aug 14, 2018
Merged

Determine active nodes in verdi calculation list based on process state#1873
sphuber merged 1 commit into
aiidateam:developfrom
sphuber:fix_1817_verdi_calculation_list_active_criterion

Conversation

@sphuber
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@sphuber sphuber commented Aug 13, 2018

Fixes #1817

The base behavior of verdi calculation list, just as its counterpart
verdi work list, should be to list all the "active" entries. However,
what constitutes an "active" entry for these two differs. For the work
command, this is determined based on the process state of the nodes.
Any node that is not in a terminal process state, is considered active.
However, for legacy reasons, in verdi calculation list the activeness
was still being based on the calculation state, which was not always in
sync with the process state, leading to inconsistent displays.

Here we update the behavior of verdi calculation list to determine the
activeness of calculation nodes based on their process state, thus
making it directly equivalent with the behavior of verdi work list and
`verdi process list.

The base behavior of `verdi calculation list`, just as its counterpart
`verdi work list`, should be to list all the "active" entries. However,
what constitutes an "active" entry for these two differs. For the work
command, this is determined based on the process state of the nodes.
Any node that is not in a terminal process state, is considered active.
However, for legacy reasons, in `verdi calculation list` the activeness
was still being based on the calculation state, which was not always in
sync with the process state, leading to inconsistent displays.

Here we update the behavior of `verdi calculation list` to determine the
activeness of calculation nodes based on their process state, thus
making it directly equivalent with the behavior of `verdi work list` and
`verdi process list.
@codecov-io
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

Merging #1873 into develop will increase coverage by 5.38%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #1873      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    61.38%   66.77%   +5.38%     
===========================================
  Files          320      320              
  Lines        32549    32548       -1     
===========================================
+ Hits         19981    21734    +1753     
+ Misses       12568    10814    -1754
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
aiida/cmdline/params/options/__init__.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
aiida/cmdline/utils/query/calculation.py 93.22% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
aiida/cmdline/commands/cmd_calculation.py 71.13% <100%> (+0.23%) ⬆️
aiida/common/setup.py 74.84% <0%> (+0.2%) ⬆️
aiida/orm/implementation/general/node.py 78.5% <0%> (+0.31%) ⬆️
...orm/implementation/general/calculation/__init__.py 80.18% <0%> (+0.92%) ⬆️
...ida/common/additions/backup_script/backup_setup.py 81.11% <0%> (+1.11%) ⬆️
aiida/orm/querybuilder.py 74.16% <0%> (+1.48%) ⬆️
aiida/orm/implementation/django/user.py 88.6% <0%> (+3.79%) ⬆️
aiida/orm/computer.py 87.5% <0%> (+8.33%) ⬆️
... and 26 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update dddfffc...5b63359. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@muhrin muhrin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I love it, especially in late summer

@sphuber sphuber merged commit d588fb9 into aiidateam:develop Aug 14, 2018
@sphuber sphuber deleted the fix_1817_verdi_calculation_list_active_criterion branch August 14, 2018 08:41
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