-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 69
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
refactor: make DDL overridable for column ADD
, ALTER
, and RENAME
operations
#1114
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1114 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 83.52% 83.52% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 42 42
Lines 3860 3872 +12
Branches 657 657
==========================================
+ Hits 3224 3234 +10
- Misses 472 474 +2
Partials 164 164
📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
Codecov is down by 0.52% ⬇️ As this is a refactor, and as I have a handful of other things for tap/target snowflake to get through to get to done, I'd prefer not to add testing on the refactored methods unless anyone feels very strongly about them 🙂 |
ADD
, ALTER
, and RENAME
operations
ADD
, ALTER
, and RENAME
operationsADD
, ALTER
, and RENAME
operations
@kgpayne - Do you mind adding a simple test for the DDL static method evaluation? Specifically, I'm thinking of a test for the static methods which are easily tested from a class reference and don't need the a full sink object to be created. If they return the DDL or string result expected when passed specific input values, I think that's probably reasonable. |
Renamed column add (previously create) and added tests ✅ Codecov still isn't happy though 🤦♂️ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For my part, I think I'm okay with code coverage as is here - especially since we are also working on:
Thanks for adding the additional tests for the SQL generation. 🎉
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm, the SQL API is coming together! @kgpayne the dependency review error is a false positive afaict, so feel free to merge 😄
* Closes #26 * Closes #18 * Closes #16 - completes the TODO related to meltano/sdk#1114 - Adds a default batch config because its required. Default to writing locally. - Add copy syntax if key properties dont exist. Previously the merge logic was invalid due to syntax errors. Apparently my first test data didnt have key properties - `conform_record_data_types` requires a new `level` kwarg and was failing because it was missing. - the `column_exists` methods was being called a ton and was querying snowflake for all columns every time which was slow so I have it caching now - the `schema_exists` method failed for me because `get_schema_names` returns all lower columns. It errored because it was trying to create a schema that already existed. - bumped SDK to 0.27.0 - after bumping the SDK I needed to address #16 which means `create_sqlalchemy_engine` was effectively replaced with `create_engine` - Also fix import failure of `lazy_chunked_generator` that was moved in SDK I'm able to test that this works with the sample tap-github data from the getting started guide. --------- Co-authored-by: Edgar R. M. <edgarrm358@gmail.com>
Closes #1033
ALTER TABLE
andALTER COLUMN
syntax to be overridden #1033📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://meltano-sdk--1114.org.readthedocs.build/en/1114/