Skip to content

Audit remaining notebooks for executable CI coverage #2164

Description

@lmeyerov

Audit remaining notebooks for executable CI coverage

#2163 adds an indexing notebook and brings the regular test-docs execution list to six notebooks: import smoke test, temporal predicates, hop bounds, indexing examples, validation fundamentals, and static rendering. All six executed successfully in CI. Read the Docs renders notebooks with nbsphinx_execute = "never"; its build alone does not validate execution.

Audit the remaining tracked notebooks for useful execution coverage. Executing the validation tutorial exposed an obsolete API argument and missing-column examples that needed explicit strict mode, so this audit should check the promised behavior as well as successful execution.

Initial candidates and constraints:

  • demos/gfql/benchmark_filter_pagerank_cpu_gpu.ipynb: its presentation helper reads ignored local benchmark receipts under plans/. Make its required data available in a clean checkout, or provide a small self-contained CPU example. Preserve verified benchmark provenance when displaying measured numbers.
  • demos/demos_databases_apis/graphviz/plot_static_demo.ipynb: overlaps the covered rendering tutorial and can fall back to printing code when pygraphviz is absent. Any CI coverage should require real rendering.
  • demos/more_examples/graphistry_features/layout_tree.ipynb: large random graphs and very large figures need a bounded, deterministic CI mode.
  • GPU memory, CPU/GPU benchmark, and remote GFQL/Python notebooks need suitable hardware, datasets, or authenticated services. Identify dedicated lanes and explicit reasons for notebooks that remain outside regular CPU docs CI.

Acceptance criteria:

  • Inventory notebook paths, dependencies, external data/services, expected runtime, and existing coverage.
  • Execute promising CPU candidates from a clean checkout using the docs environment; repair stale examples and add meaningful result/error assertions where appropriate.
  • Add verified candidates to the existing execution flow without making docs CI depend on large downloads or unavailable hardware/services.
  • Record coverage or an explicit exclusion reason for the remainder, with separate follow-ups for GPU/service lanes and fixture cleanup.
  • Confirm CI logs show actual execution and fail on notebook errors; rendering or optional-dependency fallback alone does not count.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions