fix: unit tests with versioned refs

[devmessias]

Resolves #10880; Resolves #10528; Resolves #10623

Problem

The error raises due the method RefableLookup.find at dbt-my/core/dbt/contracts/graph/manifest.py:

Tracking the storage object, without specifying a version in the model we will obtain something like that for the Unit Test Node running phase

{'upstream_model_versioned': {}, 'upstream_model_versioned.v<LATEST>': {'demo_dbt_py': 'model.demo_dbt_py.upstream_model_versioned'}} 

Which it seems to me that is not right, because if I specified the latest_version for my model, I should get a Storage like this

{
    'upstream_model_versioned': {'demo_dbt_py': 'model.demo_dbt_py.upstream_model_versioned'}, 
    'upstream_model_versioned.v <LATEST> ': {'demo_dbt_py': 'model.demo_dbt_py.upstream_model_versioned'} 
} 

I run some different cases and obtain the following table

Status	Model Ref	Model Latest	Test Ref	Test Latest	Expectation	v on find	Compilation Message
❌	true	true	true	false	fail	1	depends on a node named 'upstream_model_versioned' with version '1' which was not found
❌	true	false	false	None	fail	2	depends on a node named 'upstream_model_versioned' with version '2' which was not found
❌	false	None	false	false	success	None	depends on a node named 'upstream_model_versioned' which was not found
❌	false	None	true	true	success	None	depends on a node named 'upstream_model_versioned' which was not found
✅	true	true	false	None	success	1	model.demo_dbt_py.upstream_model_versioned
✅	true	true	true	true	success	1	model.demo_dbt_py.upstream_model_versioned
✅	true	false	true	false	success	2	model.demo_dbt_py.upstream_model_versioned

However, even in cases where the tests were successful, the storage objects it seems that not properly constructed. For example, when using ref('upstream_model_versioned', v=1) I got this:

{'upstream_model_versioned': {}, 
 'upstream_model_versioned.v1': {'demo_dbt_py': 'model.demo_dbt_py.upstream_model_versioned'}}

This worked not because the storage structure was correct, but because there was a key named upstream_model_versioned.v1.

Solution

The only problem that I found is that the Node object for the UnitTest was not copying the value from latest_version prop if it was available

Checklist

• I have read the contributing guide and understand what's expected of me.
• I have run this code in development, and it appears to resolve the stated issue.
• This PR includes tests, or tests are not required or relevant for this PR.
• This PR has no interface changes (e.g., macros, CLI, logs, JSON artifacts, config files, adapter interface, etc.) or this PR has already received feedback and approval from Product or DX.
• This PR includes type annotations for new and modified functions.

[github-actions]

Thank you for your pull request! We could not find a changelog entry for this change. For details on how to document a change, see the contributing guide.

[github-actions]

Thank you for your pull request! We could not find a changelog entry for this change. For details on how to document a change, see the contributing guide.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 62.78%. Comparing base (89caa33) to head (82b2056).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (89caa33) and HEAD (82b2056). Click for more details.

HEAD has 41 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (89caa33)	HEAD (82b2056)
unit	7	1
integration	35	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #10889       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   89.10%   62.78%   -26.33%     
===========================================
  Files         183      183               
  Lines       23626    23630        +4     
===========================================
- Hits        21051    14835     -6216     
- Misses       2575     8795     +6220     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	?
unit	62.78% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

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

Components	Coverage Δ
Unit Tests	62.78% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
Integration Tests	62.78% <0.00%> (-26.33%)	⬇️

[devmessias]

Hello @dbeatty10. This is a PR with a very simple fix that closes 3 open issues. It's covered by functional tests, but I’m not sure why this class doesn’t have any unit tests, so I left that aside.

[MichelleArk]

Thank you for the contribution @devmessias!

This is looking good overall, but it looks like this PR is failing on unrelated functional tests with the same 'strategy' error for tests related to snapshots. We've been doing a lot of work on snapshots recently so it may just be an intermittent issue that has since been resolved. Could you please merge main into this branch and re-run the tests?

Otherwise, just a refactoring suggestion for clarity, as well as some examples of testing for expected errors in logs.

[devmessias]

Hi @MichelleArk , the branch is now updated