[AIRFLOW-1595] Change to construct sqlite_hook from connection schema

[mrkm4ntr]

Dear Airflow maintainers,

Please accept this PR. I understand that it will not be reviewed until I have checked off all the steps below!

JIRA

• My PR addresses the following Airflow JIRA issues and references them in the PR title. For example, "[AIRFLOW-XXX] My Airflow PR"
  • https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1595

Description

• Here are some details about my PR, including screenshots of any UI changes:
  SqliteHook is built using the host attribute of connection, but correctly we should use the schema attribute. The connection created from URI has no host attribute.

Tests

• My PR adds the following unit tests OR does not need testing for this extremely good reason:

• tests/hooks/test_sqlite_hook.py

Commits

• My commits all reference JIRA issues in their subject lines, and I have squashed multiple commits if they address the same issue. In addition, my commits follow the guidelines from "How to write a good git commit message":
  1. Subject is separated from body by a blank line
  2. Subject is limited to 50 characters
  3. Subject does not end with a period
  4. Subject uses the imperative mood ("add", not "adding")
  5. Body wraps at 72 characters
  6. Body explains "what" and "why", not "how"

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #2598 into master will decrease coverage by 5.5%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2598      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   76.47%   70.96%   -5.51%     
==========================================
  Files         203      150      -53     
  Lines       15012    11607    -3405     
==========================================
- Hits        11480     8237    -3243     
+ Misses       3532     3370     -162

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
airflow/utils/db.py	84.55% <ø> (+50.68%)	⬆️
airflow/hooks/sqlite_hook.py	100% <100%> (ø)	⬆️
airflow/operators/redshift_to_s3_operator.py	0% <0%> (-95.46%)	⬇️
airflow/hooks/jdbc_hook.py	0% <0%> (-94.45%)	⬇️
airflow/operators/s3_file_transform_operator.py	0% <0%> (-93.62%)	⬇️
airflow/executors/celery_executor.py	0% <0%> (-85.49%)	⬇️
airflow/hooks/S3_hook.py	22.27% <0%> (-72.32%)	⬇️
airflow/hooks/mssql_hook.py	6.66% <0%> (-66.67%)	⬇️
airflow/utils/log/s3_task_handler.py	37.5% <0%> (-61.08%)	⬇️
airflow/hooks/hdfs_hook.py	32.5% <0%> (-60%)	⬇️
... and 200 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 4ce2502...c4d9b6d. Read the comment docs.

[ashb]

To resurrect an old PR: This PR might make sense, but as it is it would break any existing connections that are defined.

The issue is probably around how the connections are created. If for instance I create a connection like this airflow connections -a --conn_id foo --conn_uri sqlite://path/to/file.sqlite then I end up with {"host": "path", "schema": "to/file.sqlite"} so the fix wouldn't actually help for this case either.

The new options added recently (1.9.0, 1.10.0?) to be able to directly specify --conn_host probably make this PR as structured not needed, and a doc change in the SqliteHook all that is needed. (I'm not expecting you to do that, just commenting)

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.