Skip to content
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

Destination Databricks: connector should support schema evolution (schemaMerge) #26658

Closed
gpodevijn opened this issue May 26, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #26942
Closed

Destination Databricks: connector should support schema evolution (schemaMerge) #26658

gpodevijn opened this issue May 26, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #26942

Comments

@gpodevijn
Copy link
Contributor

gpodevijn commented May 26, 2023

What area the feature impact?

Connectors

Revelant Information

Databricks and its delta tables support schema evolution via the COPY INTO command parameter's mergeSchema=true. The connector should provide a parameter to enable or disable schema evolution.

In #26942, we added an option in the connector configuration interface to enable or disable schema evolution:
image

This option, once enabled, sets the following parameter to the COPY INTO statement used to load the data into the destination table (set to false by default): COPY_OPTIONS ('mergeSchema' = 'true')

We conducted some tests locally and it works great so far. We planned on running it in production in the coming weeks.

@gpodevijn gpodevijn added needs-triage type/enhancement New feature or request labels May 26, 2023
@igrankova igrankova changed the title The databicks destination connector should support schema evolution (schemaMerge) Destination Databicks: connector should support schema evolution (schemaMerge) Jun 1, 2023
@marcosmarxm marcosmarxm changed the title Destination Databicks: connector should support schema evolution (schemaMerge) Destination Databricks: connector should support schema evolution (schemaMerge) Jun 2, 2023
@evantahler
Copy link
Contributor

Nice! How's the work going internally?

@gpodevijn
Copy link
Contributor Author

gpodevijn commented Jun 6, 2023

Thanks @evantahler !
The team reviewed the associated PR before we opened it here. We made several tests locally but it's not yet running in production (because we don't run Airbyte in production yet), but it's planned for the up coming weeks. I will update the original issue with the link to the PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants