update branch analytics

[jd-lara]

This branch adds features to process branch quantities.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 96.42857% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 89.00%. Comparing base (50b9902) to head (1181e34).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/get_data.jl	96.42%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #78      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   87.94%   89.00%   +1.05%     
==========================================
  Files           7        7              
  Lines         763      791      +28     
==========================================
+ Hits          671      704      +33     
+ Misses         92       87       -5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	89.00% <96.42%> (+1.05%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. 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:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[luke-kiernan]

I'd suggest adding a test with an AC power flow in-the-loop. Otherwise looks straightforward enough.

[PabloBotin]

@luke-kiernan can you add the test so that we can merge this?

[luke-kiernan]

can you add the test so that we can merge this?

Added.

Separately: the CI showed as timing out on mac. Rather strange...if it happens again, worth looking into

[luke-kiernan]

The CI failure exposed a real issue: dict iteration order in add_aux_variables! decides which of FromTo/ToFrom wins per component type, so the result may be inconsistent between Julia versions, platforms, etc. Seems like we need to decide which aux var we're keeping per branch type and explicitly encode that somewhere. (Alternative: allow for multiple aux vars per branch type, but that'd be a bigger change.)

edit: the non-first keys hit the continue in
PSI.get_component_type(param_key) ∈ PSI.get_component_type.(keys(variables)) && continue.

[PabloBotin]

Shall we merge this and open a different issue for that?

[jd-lara]

The CI failure exposed a real issue: dict iteration order in add_aux_variables! decides which of FromTo/ToFrom wins per component type, so the result may be inconsistent between Julia versions, platforms, etc. Seems like we need to decide which aux var we're keeping per branch type and explicitly encode that somewhere. (Alternative: allow for multiple aux vars per branch type, but that'd be a bigger change.)

edit: the non-first keys hit the continue in PSI.get_component_type(param_key) ∈ PSI.get_component_type.(keys(variables)) && continue.

Yeah, this was a problem from the original design from WAYYY back that assummed only single flow from the lines. I'd suggest adding a ordered dict for consistency and refactoring later