Passing run #20323 ↗︎

0

4

0

0

0

Details:

_{This comment has been generated by cypress-bot as a result of this project's GitHub integration settings.}

Maybe better to add it under the etl schema rather than events through this route? I'm also thinking if anywhere it belongs in the infrastructure schema. No objection in principle to the create occurring here, but shall we add the ddl for it to the flowdb schema as well?

Maybe better to add it under the etl schema rather than events through this route? I'm also thinking if anywhere it belongs in the infrastructure schema. No objection in principle to the create occurring here, but shall we add the ddl for it to the flowdb schema as well?

My reasoning for putting the table in events rather than infrastructure is that it contains information specifically about the location IDs appearing in the CDR records, irrespective of whether they correspond to actual infrastructure (i.e. if we're debugging a discrepancy between CDR and cell info, this table will be providing the information from the events side).

Could put it in etl, but it doesn't really relate to the ETL, it's just populated through the ETL process. Although if it's not actually defined in the FlowDB schema and only created on-the-fly by FlowETL then arguably it should live in the etl schema.

I think you're right, we should add the DDL to the FlowDB schema. I'm not keen on having it in the FlowDB schema and in the ETL task, because then there's a risk of the two getting out-of-sync. Perhaps it's best to have it in the FlowDB scripts only, and then if the task tries to run on a schema that's not updated it will fail. In lieu of a proper migration process, it's probably not actually very helpful to start scattering partial migration steps throughout the ETL.

A follow on question would then be if we actually want a separate events_metadata schema maybe, but that doesn't feel required at this stage.

Codecov Report

Merging #6164 (cbec098) into master (e2cf418) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #6164   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.24%   93.25%           
=======================================
  Files         277      278    +1     
  Lines       10828    10832    +4     
  Branches      895      895           
=======================================
+ Hits        10097    10101    +4     
  Misses        602      602           
  Partials      129      129           

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more