fix(cypress): wait for filterValues request

[nytai]

SUMMARY

Seeing a lot of cypress failures for explore/AdhocFilters test. 🤞 this makes it less flaky.

BEFORE/AFTER SCREENSHOTS OR ANIMATED GIF

N/A

TEST PLAN

ran the cypress check 3 times without failures... seems to be an improvement

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

• Has associated issue:
• Changes UI
• Requires DB Migration.
• Confirm DB Migration upgrade and downgrade tested.
• Introduces new feature or API
• Removes existing feature or API

[ktmud]

LGTM! On a separate note, I'm actually seeing a lot of errors related to Dashboard CRUD view in my personal fork: https://dashboard.cypress.io/projects/ukwxzo/runs/440/failures The fork runs the exactly same code, it just records the runs to Cypress dashboard. Have you seen anything similar before?

[mistercrunch]

I'm seeing codecov download/uplaod step in cypress trigger :/ Let's get CI back on track!

[mistercrunch]

[nytai]

@ktmud Most of the cypress ci failures I've been seeing have been in AdhocFilters test. Have you noticed flakiness in the dashboard CRUD views tests in this repo? Seems quite strange that it would be happening in your fork but not in this repo

[villebro]

Big thanks @nytai, I was wondering why my one-liner doc PR was failing miserably on CI 😄

[ktmud]

@nytai Yeah, it's really strange that it only fails in my fork but it shouldn't really matter if it's not happening for everyone else.

Although I was still seeing AdhocFilters failing after rebasing to this fix: https://github.com/apache/incubator-superset/pull/10837/checks?check_run_id=1119508451

So I made another attempt to fix it: 4477fdd

Based on my previous experience, there seems to be some flakiness related to cy.get(...).within(...) so I removed the within calls. I remember reading somewhere in Cypress it's always better to re-select the element other than relying on within but I couldn't find the link.

[nytai]

Yup.... also got a random failure for the dashboard/list_view.test.ts on https://github.com/apache/incubator-superset/pull/10892/checks?check_run_id=1119843982 seems there's still quite a bit of flakiness in the suite.