You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 31, 2022. It is now read-only.
Sorry if this isn't the appropriate place to ask about this. Please close it if not. I'm working on my very first python script and I've been looking for a way to get the field names and data types for just the record set returned by my query.
client.get_metadata() returns all fields, but I want to build a dictionary using just the fields in my results.
Response headers X-SODA2-Fields (and X-SODA2-Types) should return a set limited to just the fields returned by the get() request.
Is this something that could be supported? I can see in utils.py the response header is processed for response codes, but cannot find anything that processes these fields. Or maybe I should just use requests instead?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
After thinking about this more carefully, yeah I think you should just use requests directly. If I understand your request correctly, what you want is actually something that constitutes the "Transform" part of ETL. This library is primarily concerned with the "Extract" layer.
Sorry if this isn't the appropriate place to ask about this. Please close it if not. I'm working on my very first python script and I've been looking for a way to get the field names and data types for just the record set returned by my query.
client.get_metadata() returns all fields, but I want to build a dictionary using just the fields in my results.
Response headers X-SODA2-Fields (and X-SODA2-Types) should return a set limited to just the fields returned by the get() request.
Is this something that could be supported? I can see in utils.py the response header is processed for response codes, but cannot find anything that processes these fields. Or maybe I should just use requests instead?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: