[kz930]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

A visualization operator produces no table, so the table comparison has nothing to read. It writes a plotly figure and an HTML page, and this compares those.

A chart's meaning is in the numbers behind it, so the comparison reads those rather than the rendered picture, which would fail over a layout detail that carries none. The figure is compared trace by trace.

The page needs two things normalized away first, neither of which is markup the operator chose: a Styler id, which pandas regenerates on every run, and the line ending, which on Windows is CRLF for a file Python opened in text mode while the same markup carried through JSONL keeps the LF the engine wrote.

#8359 compares two tables, which is a different question and shares no code with this one.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Part of #8325, 7 of 27; that issue lists the set in order.

Closes #8508, the task this change is the whole of.

How was this PR tested?

VisualizationHtmlComparatorSpec pins both normalizations: two pages differing only in a Styler id compare equal, and so do two differing only in line endings, while a page differing in the markup itself does not.

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

Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 5)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

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

• Contributors with relevant context: @tanishqgandhi1908
  You can notify them by mentioning @tanishqgandhi1908 in a comment.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 92.51%. Comparing base (1fbd346) to head (739b316).
⚠️ Report is 83 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #8509      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     93.69%   92.51%   -1.19%     
- Complexity     4826     4922      +96     
============================================
  Files          1209     1223      +14     
  Lines         49871    51029    +1158     
  Branches       6099     6254     +155     
============================================
+ Hits          46727    47208     +481     
- Misses         1652     2258     +606     
- Partials       1492     1563      +71     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	77.38% <ø> (-2.81%)	⬇️
agent-service	99.32% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from e47995c
amber	88.59% <ø> (-1.33%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from e47995c
computing-unit-managing-service	60.41% <ø> (-16.74%)	⬇️
config-service	87.37% <ø> (+0.24%)	⬆️
file-service	81.53% <ø> (-2.12%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from e47995c
frontend	96.16% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from e47995c
notebook-migration-service	83.73% <ø> (ø)
pyamber	98.47% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from e47995c
workflow-compiling-service	74.09% <ø> (-3.10%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from e47995c

*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.

[carloea2]

There is also a build dependency missing in this PR: VisualizationJsonComparator imports PythonWorkerPool from WorkflowOperator test sources, but WorkflowCompilingService does not depend on those test classes. The current CI job fails to compile that import. Please include the test dependency here so this PR builds independently. CI: https://github.com/apache/texera/actions/runs/34804943402/job/103854922027

[kz930]

Good catch, thanks. Added the test-scope dependency in dfa14dc, so the PR builds on its own now. The same line is in #8357 with identical wording, so the two merge without a conflict.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 2 better · 🔴 7 worse · ⚪ 6 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main 7b8422e 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	543	0.331	17,104/23,315/23,315 us	🔴 +19.7% / 🔴 +65.5%
🔴	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	1,188	0.725	80,476/129,658/129,658 us	🔴 +33.9% / 🔴 +34.5%
🟢	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	1,448	0.884	685,916/771,314/771,314 us	🟢 -8.6% / 🟢 -22.6%

Baseline details

Latest main 7b8422e from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	543 tuples/sec	630 tuples/sec	888.52 tuples/sec	-13.8%	-38.9%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.331 MB/s	0.385 MB/s	0.542 MB/s	-14.0%	-39.0%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	17,104 us	14,292 us	11,467 us	+19.7%	+49.2%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	23,315 us	22,628 us	14,087 us	+3.0%	+65.5%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	23,315 us	22,628 us	17,519 us	+3.0%	+33.1%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	1,188 tuples/sec	1,277 tuples/sec	1,174 tuples/sec	-7.0%	+1.2%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.725 MB/s	0.78 MB/s	0.716 MB/s	-7.1%	+1.2%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	80,476 us	77,509 us	89,952 us	+3.8%	-10.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	129,658 us	96,862 us	96,426 us	+33.9%	+34.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	129,658 us	96,862 us	110,188 us	+33.9%	+17.7%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	1,448 tuples/sec	1,447 tuples/sec	1,204 tuples/sec	+0.1%	+20.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.884 MB/s	0.883 MB/s	0.735 MB/s	+0.1%	+20.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	685,916 us	680,992 us	886,711 us	+0.7%	-22.6%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	771,314 us	843,478 us	928,644 us	-8.6%	-16.9%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	771,314 us	843,478 us	972,356 us	-8.6%	-20.7%

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
0,10,10,64,20,368.49,200,128000,543,0.331,17104.05,23315.19,23315.19
1,100,10,64,20,1684.11,2000,1280000,1188,0.725,80476.49,129658.06,129658.06
2,1000,10,64,20,13813.15,20000,12800000,1448,0.884,685915.58,771313.86,771313.86

[carloea2]

The HTML ID handling now preserves cell text. The comparator tests look good.

[carloea2]

The HTML comparison reads only the first nonempty runtime row. If native returns HTML A and B but standalone returns only A, this still passes. Visualization operators can emit one HTML result per input row. Please compare every row and add a multirow case.

[kz930]

Fixed in fe7ac26: the two sides are compared as sequences now, so a run that drew a chart the exported script never drew fails instead of passing on its first row, and the message says how many each path drew. The multirow case is in, with the second chart named in the failure.

[carloea2]

The HTML comparison now checks every runtime row and rejects a missing extra result. The earlier finding is fixed. Looks good.

[carloea2]

The added figure comparison tests cover the revised chart handling. No new blocker found.

[carloea2]

Reviewed the current head. All eight focused comparator tests and scalafmtCheckAll pass with compare.py and the IntegrationTest annotation supplied from #8359. The earlier cell-text normalization finding remains fixed. The standalone branch still needs those dependency files, so this is not a merge-ready approval. Leaving it as a draft.

[carloea2]

All 8 visualization comparator tests and scalafmtCheckAll pass with compare.py supplied from #8359. The earlier cell-text normalization finding stays fixed, and extra chart rows are rejected. Approved for the declared dependency order, not for merging before #8359.