Job separation on summary page

[nigelbabu]

The final ask (for now) is to possibly look at a column or separation around job. This is useful to understand what failed with mux vs non-mux (for starters) and once we can list by jobs, or add job based columns it may become easier.

[ShyamsundarR]

The intention is the be able to query the failure database in different ways, for example,

• show all tests in that failed in line-coverage jobs
• Or, replace the above with mux/non-mux

The intention is the be able to arrive at failures that are specific to a type of job, or to at least get to those faster. Also, it looks like each failure stores which job it failed, from, hence requesting the ability to extend the frontend to provide reports of the same nature.

[nigelbabu]

@ShyamsundarR Should I list all the jobs by name? Or do you want me to do some pre-defined grouping? For example line-coverage, mux, non-mux? (Or both?)

[atinmu]

I'd vote for having both the approaches.

[ShyamsundarR]

Let me answer this by expanding on the request to give an idea about what we may want in the future,

• Curent query is: date-range && branch
• Future query can be: "date-range && (branch || job || node || has-bugs || ...)"

I am unsure how the UI will look/evolve, but the idea is to be able to literally generate a free form query and get a list.

The above should solve all issues as I see it, grouping/values for each of the above fields would depend on all unique values in the filed (I guess) so pre-defined groups may not be needed?