Add missing integration tests to CI and fix json.Number assertions

[mason-sharp]

Fix TestRepsetDiff_DivergentTable and TestRepsetDiff_MultipleTables which compared float64(99) against json.Number("99") — broken since OrderedMap.UnmarshalJSON started using dec.UseNumber() for bigint precision.

Add CI steps for repset-diff, schema-diff, Merkle numeric scale invariance, catastrophic single-node failure recovery, and timestamp comparison tests that were not being run.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: afa8ce3a-9782-449b-916b-85c26f304ff4

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4b86a03 and b34dca4.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/workflows/test.yml

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• .github/workflows/test.yml

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The GitHub Actions CI workflow was expanded to run multiple integration test steps instead of a single test. Test assertions in the diff test were updated to expect json.Number("99") instead of float64(99) for divergent-row id values, aligning with JSON decoding behavior.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
CI Workflow Configuration .github/workflows/test.yml	Renamed and replaced the single go test step to multiple go test -count=1 -v ./tests/integration -run ... steps covering TestRepsetDiff_*, TestSchemaDiff_*, TestMerkleTreeNumericScaleInvariance, TestCatastrophicSingleNodeFailure, and grouped timestamp comparison tests.
Test Assertions tests/integration/repset_diff_test.go	Updated assertions in TestRepsetDiff_DivergentTable and TestRepsetDiff_MultipleTables to expect json.Number("99") for the id field instead of float64(99).

Poem

🐇 I hopped through CI, nose to the ground,
I swapped a lone test for a bustling round,
Numbers now dressed as JSON, neat and small,
Divergent rows answered my tiny call,
Hooray—more tests, more spring in my bound!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The pull request title accurately captures both main objectives: fixing json.Number assertions and adding missing integration tests to CI.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description clearly explains the bug fixes and the addition of CI test steps, providing context about json.Number usage and which tests were missing from CI.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch update_ci_tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[codacy-production]

Up to standards ✅

🟢 Issues 0 issues

Results:
0 new issues

View in Codacy

🟢 Metrics 0 complexity · 0 duplication

Metric	Results
Complexity	0
Duplication	0

View in Codacy

_{TIP This summary will be updated as you push new changes. Give us feedback}