Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jd/multiple fixes #1145

Open
wants to merge 40 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Jd/multiple fixes #1145

wants to merge 40 commits into from

Conversation

jd-lara
Copy link
Member

@jd-lara jd-lara commented Sep 21, 2024

fixes #1133
fixes #1140
fixes #1129
fixes #1116
fixes #1148
fixes #1151

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Sep 23, 2024

Performance Results

Version Precompile Time
Main 3.329532272
This Branch 3.256950036
Version Build Time
Main-Build Time Precompile 54.130729052
Main-Build Time Postcompile 1.275106403
This Branch-Build Time Precompile 54.843392357
This Branch-Build Time Postcompile 1.110941619
Version Build Time
Main-Solve Time Precompile 421.20820541
Main-Solve Time Postcompile 393.171195487
This Branch-Solve Time Precompile 449.581943888
This Branch-Solve Time Postcompile 412.849596694

@jd-lara jd-lara changed the base branch from jd/param_update_fixes to main September 24, 2024 23:34
@jd-lara jd-lara self-assigned this Sep 24, 2024
@jd-lara jd-lara marked this pull request as ready for review September 24, 2024 23:34
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 25, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.43860% with 226 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 78.44%. Comparing base (f7e83f4) to head (88dfd7f).
Report is 30 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...rc/parameters/update_container_parameter_values.jl 34.76% 137 Missing ⚠️
src/parameters/update_cost_parameters.jl 0.00% 60 Missing ⚠️
...devices_models/devices/common/add_to_expression.jl 38.46% 8 Missing ⚠️
.../operation/operation_model_simulation_interface.jl 65.00% 7 Missing ⚠️
src/core/optimization_container.jl 44.44% 5 Missing ⚠️
src/initial_conditions/add_initial_condition.jl 84.61% 4 Missing ⚠️
...ices_models/devices/common/duration_constraints.jl 86.66% 2 Missing ⚠️
src/parameters/update_parameters.jl 33.33% 2 Missing ⚠️
src/utils/jump_utils.jl 83.33% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1145      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   77.89%   78.44%   +0.55%     
==========================================
  Files         118      121       +3     
  Lines       12700    12793      +93     
==========================================
+ Hits         9893    10036     +143     
+ Misses       2807     2757      -50     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 78.44% <50.43%> (+0.55%) ⬆️

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/PowerSimulations.jl 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/core/initial_conditions.jl 57.44% <ø> (ø)
src/core/settings.jl 93.15% <100.00%> (+0.09%) ⬆️
...s_models/device_constructors/branch_constructor.jl 83.33% <ø> (+2.83%) ⬆️
...models/devices/common/objective_function/common.jl 88.77% <100.00%> (+0.35%) ⬆️
...ls/devices/common/objective_function/market_bid.jl 36.42% <ø> (+1.73%) ⬆️
.../devices_models/devices/common/range_constraint.jl 74.71% <100.00%> (+3.53%) ⬆️
src/devices_models/devices/thermal_generation.jl 85.00% <100.00%> (-0.55%) ⬇️
src/operation/decision_model.jl 92.59% <100.00%> (+1.31%) ⬆️
src/operation/emulation_model.jl 86.40% <100.00%> (+0.40%) ⬆️
... and 14 more

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm concerned about this add to expression with must run are working properly without testing. Did we QA/QC those ones?

Copy link
Contributor

@rodrigomha rodrigomha left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks great. I have one major concern regarding the testing of the add to expression when must run is on, and I'm not exactly sure where the fix of the On variable happens now.

@jd-lara
Copy link
Member Author

jd-lara commented Sep 28, 2024

@rodrigomha I have to add a test for that case to and fix StorageSystemsSimulations.jl

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants