Move databricks module into the databases directory #1555
Conversation
dimberman
requested review from
tatiana,
utkarsharma2,
sunank200,
pankajastro,
pankajkoti and
feluelle
as code owners
Codecov ReportBase: 94.00% // Head: 93.21% // Decreases project coverage by
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1555 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 94.00% 93.21% -0.80%
==========================================
Files 89 67 -22
Lines 4368 3579 -789
Branches 432 432
==========================================
- Hits 4106 3336 -770
+ Misses 178 159 -19
Partials 84 84
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great to see it together with the other databases! I'm happy for it to be merged once the checks are passing.
I wonder if, in a separate ticket, we could try to extend existing fixtures for other DBs and try to unify a bit of tests for load_file and export_file
|
Link: https://deepsource.io/gh/astronomer/astro-sdk/run/28eec7e3-e48b-4c50-ad29-2e6f90298642/python/ 2 of the 3 suggestions from deep source should be fixed -- but since it wasn't added in this PR, please create a separate PR to fix those The other test failure was not related to this PR -- but probably flaky that we should check too separately - around GCS to BQ load |
|
Sure @kaxil - we will create a PR for that cc @pankajastro |
@phanikumv @kaxil I tried to make changes in these files to re-produce it but I'm unable to re-reproduce #1565 https://deepsource.io/gh/astronomer/astro-sdk/run/e3fb7ef7-1f58-4f80-bcf8-96d53b2012d2/python/ but I have improved some check as suggested by deepsource |
# Description Address: #1555 (comment) ## What is the current behavior? Fix some deepsource issues ## Does this introduce a breaking change? No ### Checklist - [ ] Created tests which fail without the change (if possible) - [ ] Extended the README / documentation, if necessary
## What is the current behavior? Currently the "databricks" module lives at the top level of the python SDK, this can be somewhat confusing as it might lead users to think there is non-database functionality in the databricks module. By moving the databricks module into the database module, we insulate the class and ensure that it is treated like any other database going forward.
# Description Address: #1555 (comment) ## What is the current behavior? Fix some deepsource issues ## Does this introduce a breaking change? No ### Checklist - [ ] Created tests which fail without the change (if possible) - [ ] Extended the README / documentation, if necessary
Description
What is the current behavior?
Currently the "databricks" module lives at the top level of the python SDK, this can be somewhat confusing as it might lead users to think there is non-database functionality in the databricks module. By moving the databricks module into the database module, we insulate the class and ensure that it is treated like any other database going forward.
Checklist