fix: Ignore database extra fields when saving

[michael-s-molina]

SUMMARY

Ignore database extra fields when saving. This is a fix for a regression that prevented the saving of databases or the creation of new ones. The client is sending more data than it should, and this fix ignores this extra data for now. We should definitely fix the client side to send only the necessary information to the API.

@eschutho I know that you are working on this modal. Can you make this modification? After that, you can undo this hotfix.

BEFORE/AFTER SCREENSHOTS OR ANIMATED GIF

@rusackas @villebro @dpgaspar @junlincc @eschutho

TEST PLAN

1 - Execute all tests
2 - All tests should pass

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

• Has associated issue:
• Changes UI
• Includes DB Migration (follow approval process in SIP-59)
  • Migration is atomic, supports rollback & is backwards-compatible
  • Confirm DB migration upgrade and downgrade tested
  • Runtime estimates and downtime expectations provided
• Introduces new feature or API
• Removes existing feature or API

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #14465 (6f33e69) into master (158ac30) will decrease coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 63.76%.

❗ Current head 6f33e69 differs from pull request most recent head d47b95e. Consider uploading reports for the commit d47b95e to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #14465      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   77.02%   76.98%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         957      954       -3     
  Lines       48151    48179      +28     
  Branches     6056     6063       +7     
==========================================
+ Hits        37089    37093       +4     
- Misses      10861    10885      +24     
  Partials      201      201              

Flag	Coverage Δ
hive	?
mysql	81.06% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
postgres	81.09% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
presto	80.80% <100.00%> (?)
python	81.36% <100.00%> (-0.10%)	⬇️
sqlite	80.70% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...rontend/src/dashboard/containers/DashboardPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
superset-frontend/src/views/App.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
superset/views/base.py	76.19% <ø> (ø)
superset/views/core.py	75.64% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
...rontend/src/views/CRUD/dashboard/DashboardCard.tsx	77.27% <66.66%> (+1.08%)	⬆️
superset-frontend/src/utils/urlUtils.ts	61.53% <75.00%> (+2.44%)	⬆️
superset-frontend/src/views/routes.tsx	64.86% <80.00%> (+1.22%)	⬆️
...set-frontend/src/components/ListViewCard/index.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
superset-frontend/src/components/Menu/Menu.tsx	69.47% <100.00%> (+0.99%)	⬆️
...rontend/src/views/CRUD/dashboard/DashboardList.tsx	75.83% <100.00%> (+0.20%)	⬆️
... and 9 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 158ac30...d47b95e. Read the comment docs.

[dpgaspar]

Looks good to me has a quick fix. We should eventually fix the database modal so that it does not send the allows_* extra fields to the backend.

[villebro]

Thanks for investigating and fixing this @michael-s-molina! I agree with Daniel, let's get this in asap but aim to do a more proper follow-up once the dust settles.

[villebro]

FYI @eschutho I checked that this was working prior to #14436 and broke after that one, so there appears to have been something in the refactor that introduced this.

[eschutho]

Thank you for catching @michael-s-molina. We also reverted the PR and here's the fix: #14470