have configured SonarLint in the connected mode to sonarqube server. in the quality profile have only sonarrules (no 3rd party plugins such as Findbugs). but still violation counts are different, means high on the sonarqube server compared to sonarlint. is there any specific reason for this difference? want to check - in local scanning happens on source code rather than the binary, but in the server it always happens on binary. violation count difference might be due to this reason? please share details Thanks and Regards, Balachandran A.V

Hi Balachandran, [image] Balachandran AV: but still violation counts are different, means high on the sonarqube server compared to sonarlint. is there any specific reason for this difference? We’re going to need a few more details. First, what is your SonarLint flavor and version? what is your SonarQube version and edition (check the page footer if you’re not sure) can you characterize which issues/rules are showing up in SonarQube and not in SonarLint? Thx, Ann

[quote=“G Ann Campbell, post:2, topic:101390, username:ganncamp”] what is your SonarLint flavor and version? - SonarLint 9.0.0.75308 with Intellij IDEA what is your SonarQube version and edition - Enterprise Edition and Version 9.9.2 (build 77730) can you characterize which issues/rules are showing up in SonarQube and not in SonarLint? tried comparing the rules…basically tried exporting the rules (copy and paste) from SonarLint, not very successful. can you guide, what exactly you need to extract and share

Hi, Thanks for the detail. There are certain rules that we deliberately don’t run in SonarLint. For instance executing taint analysis rules in the IDE would drag it down, so you’ll only see those issues in connected mode. There are a couple other classes of rules we don’t run in SonarLint, but we recently reorganized the SL documentation & I can’t find the list at the moment. (I plan to raise that internally.) Can you give examples of the missing issues? Thx, Ann

Thanks a lot, Ann. Much appreciated for the quick response… will update you tomorrow regarding the missing rules / issues in SonarLint when compared with SonarQube rules execution. in the meantime, if you found the page, which contains this details, please do share Thanks

Thanks a lot, Ann for the response. please give me couple of days to collect the rules violation difference to share it here

Have some update. please check… Configured soanrqube with default java sonar rules. Then run code scan for couple of modules in both sonarlint connected mode and sonarqube server. Always sonarlint issues count was higher than sonarqube server. please check the attachment for count details. but done high-level analysis, its scanning the testcases, python and so on. which are additional than sonaqube scan. so, tried exclusions, refer to # 2. please refer to the image below for details [image] Configured exclusions in SonarLint connected mode for Python,test case and so on. but not working as expected. After configuring exclusions still getting the same issue count in Sonarlint. So, my question "in the connected mode, configured sonarlint exclusions works or not? please confirm. Thanks a lot, Balachandran A.V

Hi Balachandran, I’m confused. This started with you reporting that issues were missing on the SonarLint side. Now you’re saying they’re missing on the SonarQube side? In this (new) case, we would need to look at the SonarQube analysis log. I’m guessing that dependencies that are available in SonarLint aren’t available during the SonarQube analysis, leading to a more thorough analysis on the SonarLint side. The analysis / scanner log is what’s output from the analysis command. Hopefully, the log you provide - redacted as necessary - will include that command as well. This guide will help you find them. Ann

found the issue for the issue count difference between SonarLint and SonarQube. Mainly test cases scanning happens in SonarLint, which not happening in SonarQube (exclusion). so, tried to configure exclusion in the SonarQube server to get applied in the SonarLint…so far tried these options without any luck, please help to resolve. Thanks in advance Configured these in the Global Source File Exclusions **/src/test/java/** /src/test/java/** /src/test/java/**/*.java Configured these in the Global Test File Exclusions **/*.java Enabled Verbose Log. able to see the above SonarQube configure in the SonarLint Log. Looks like Global Source File exclusion is not correct, because issue count is same after and before applying these configurations… am sure, trying something wrong, please help to resolve. Thanks

Hi, Can you try configuring those exclusions at the project level? (Project Settings → General Settings → Analysis Scope) TBH, the question of applying global exclusions in SonarLint has never come up. It should work, but before we pursue the question of it not working, I’d like to make sure your exclusion patterns do what you expect when configured at the project level. Thx, Ann

Have configured SonarLint connected mode to SonarQube Server, why difference in violation count?

SonarQube for IDE IntelliJ Platform

ganncamp (G Ann Campbell) September 28, 2023, 1:22pm 6

Hi,

We’re still fleshing out the new docs, it seems. Here it is in the old docs.

Ann

Topic		Replies	Views
Sonarqube exclusions vs sonarlint IntelliJ Platform	11	971	November 16, 2023
SonarLint doesnt synchronize the rules from the analysis scope in SonarQube Visual Studio csharp , sonarqube , visualstudio , sonarqube-ide	5	2451	May 13, 2020
How to solve differen analyse results in sonarqube and sonarlint under connect mode？ IntelliJ Platform java , sonarqube	3	385	September 18, 2023
Issues for a file listed on SonarQube dont show up with a SonarLint analysis even when in Connected mode Eclipse eclipse	3	1504	October 22, 2020
File exclusions arent applied when commiting in IntelliJ IntelliJ Platform intellij , exclusions	5	3813	January 27, 2020

Have configured SonarLint connected mode to SonarQube Server, why difference in violation count?

Related topics