You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The current release of dbtvault creates the Hash keys for DV object such as HUB/SAT/Link. The data vault 2.0 standard doesn't mandate use of HASH keys, the implementation using natural/business keys is also supported by DV 2.0.
Not sure if this feature already exists and Automate-DV supports implementation without forking the codebase.
I understand the current macros are designed to support implementation with keys only. For example HUB_Airline as below:
Describe the solution you'd like
Macros supporting implementation using Natural/Business keys, for example HUB_Airline as below:
Describe alternatives you've considered
Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
spatil-1
changed the title
[FEATURE] Support Build of datavault using Natural/Business keys than Hash Keys
[FEATURE] Support Build of datavault using Natural/Business keys
Sep 13, 2023
It is on our roadmap but is currently not in development or planned for the near future. I will keep this request open and updated as and when there is news. Thank you for your patience
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The current release of dbtvault creates the Hash keys for DV object such as HUB/SAT/Link. The data vault 2.0 standard doesn't mandate use of HASH keys, the implementation using natural/business keys is also supported by DV 2.0.
Not sure if this feature already exists and Automate-DV supports implementation without forking the codebase.
I understand the current macros are designed to support implementation with keys only. For example HUB_Airline as below:
Describe the solution you'd like
Macros supporting implementation using Natural/Business keys, for example HUB_Airline as below:
Describe alternatives you've considered
Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
AB#5356
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: