ci: require 60% patch coverage in Codecov

[Yicong-Huang]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

The Codecov patch status was informational: true, so it never gated PRs. This makes it a real requirement:

• set target: 60% on coverage.status.patch.default;
• add threshold: 10% so the patch passes when coverage is at least target - threshold = 50%, softening the quantization on tiny diffs (e.g. a 2-coverable-line change passes at 1 line / 50%);
• drop the informational flag so the patch check can fail.

PRs must now cover at least 50% of the lines they change (60% target, 10% slack). Project status (auto target, 1% threshold), flag carryforward, and ignore rules are unchanged. The explanatory comment in codecov.yml is updated to match.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #6021

How was this PR tested?

Config-only change; codecov.yml validated as well-formed YAML. Codecov applies the new policy on the next PR upload.

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 4.8)

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• No candidates found from git blame history.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 56.64%. Comparing base (16a3ddf) to head (effae0d).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #6022      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     56.64%   56.64%   -0.01%     
  Complexity     3028     3028              
============================================
  Files          1124     1124              
  Lines         43298    43298              
  Branches       4667     4667              
============================================
- Hits          24525    24524       -1     
+ Misses        17335    17333       -2     
- Partials       1438     1441       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	70.00% <ø> (ø)
agent-service	44.59% <ø> (ø)
amber	58.61% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
computing-unit-managing-service	0.00% <ø> (ø)
config-service	52.30% <ø> (ø)
file-service	62.81% <ø> (ø)
frontend	49.39% <ø> (ø)
notebook-migration-service	78.57% <ø> (ø)
pyamber	90.15% <ø> (-0.05%)	⬇️
python	90.76% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 16a3ddf
workflow-compiling-service	55.14% <ø> (ø)

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 2 better · 🔴 2 worse · ⚪ 11 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main 16a3ddf benchmarked on this same runner, so the delta is largely free of cross-runner hardware noise. The "7d avg" column still reflects the gh-pages dashboard. Treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
🟢	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	409	0.249	23,931/30,791/30,791 us	🟢 -8.9% / 🔴 +100.8%
🔴	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	797	0.487	123,217/157,534/157,534 us	🔴 +9.9% / 🔴 +42.5%
⚪	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	909	0.555	1,099,230/1,139,191/1,139,191 us	⚪ within ±5% / 🔴 +7.3%

Baseline details

Latest main 16a3ddf from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	409 tuples/sec	396 tuples/sec	757.16 tuples/sec	+3.3%	-46.0%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.249 MB/s	0.242 MB/s	0.462 MB/s	+2.9%	-46.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	23,931 us	23,822 us	12,971 us	+0.5%	+84.5%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	30,791 us	33,807 us	15,333 us	-8.9%	+100.8%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	30,791 us	33,807 us	18,732 us	-8.9%	+64.4%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	797 tuples/sec	811 tuples/sec	957.66 tuples/sec	-1.7%	-16.8%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.487 MB/s	0.495 MB/s	0.585 MB/s	-1.6%	-16.7%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	123,217 us	120,510 us	103,982 us	+2.2%	+18.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	157,534 us	143,290 us	110,583 us	+9.9%	+42.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	157,534 us	143,290 us	118,369 us	+9.9%	+33.1%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	909 tuples/sec	911 tuples/sec	979.6 tuples/sec	-0.2%	-7.2%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.555 MB/s	0.556 MB/s	0.598 MB/s	-0.2%	-7.2%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	1,099,230 us	1,095,918 us	1,024,553 us	+0.3%	+7.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	1,139,191 us	1,155,812 us	1,063,789 us	-1.4%	+7.1%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	1,139,191 us	1,155,812 us	1,096,239 us	-1.4%	+3.9%

Raw CSV

config_idx,batch_size,schema_width,string_len,num_batches,total_ms,total_tuples,total_bytes,tuples_per_sec,mb_per_sec,lat_p50_us,lat_p95_us,lat_p99_us
0,10,10,64,20,489.50,200,128000,409,0.249,23931.47,30790.52,30790.52
1,100,10,64,20,2508.47,2000,1280000,797,0.487,123217.46,157533.60,157533.60
2,1000,10,64,20,21990.73,20000,12800000,909,0.555,1099230.00,1139191.29,1139191.29

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR updates the repository’s Codecov configuration to make patch coverage a gating status check (instead of informational), aiming to require meaningful test coverage for newly changed lines.

Changes:

• Updates the explanatory comment describing the intended Codecov policy.
• Configures coverage.status.patch.default with a target and removes the prior informational: true behavior.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.