-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
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
Source notion: fix schema #20639
Source notion: fix schema #20639
Conversation
/test connector=connectors/source-notion
Build PassedTest summary info:
|
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.
The changes look good, and I've got high-confidence with test_strictness_level: high
. Please add some more information into the change log as to what the breaking change is for users of the connector.
airbyte-integrations/connectors/source-notion/acceptance-test-config.yml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
airbyte-integrations/connectors/source-notion/acceptance-test-config.yml
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@@ -83,7 +83,8 @@ The connector is restricted by Notion [request limits](https://developers.notion | |||
## Changelog | |||
|
|||
| Version | Date | Pull Request | Subject | | |||
| :------ | :--------- | :------------------------------------------------------- | :-------------------------------------------------------------- | | |||
|:--------|:-----------|:---------------------------------------------------------|:----------------------------------------------------------------| | |||
| 1.0.0 | 2022-12-19 | [20639](https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/pull/20639) | Fix `Pages` stream schema | |
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.
You noted that this was a breaking change (1.0) - what should users expect to see that's changed from previous versions in their records?
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.
No changes in records - the schema itself is changed, meaning the discover
should yield different catalog now. Btw, I'm pretty sure this should cause a backward compatibility test to fail but it does not. May I ask you to take a look at it? I believe this is because there was no type
field in the root of this object
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.
@davydov-d I think your intuition is correct. Even if SAT did not detect the backward incompatibility, this is a breaking change on the page
stream. Could you please sync with @girarda and @jnr0790 to assess the impact of this breaking change and check if customer outreach is needed?
I'm under the impression you're fixing a nonworking stream, but it'd be worth double-checking that the stream is failing for all the users. It would help to spot the differences if you could share the output of discover
in 0.1.10
vs 1.0.0
.
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.
Sure! I'm attaching the output for the Pages
stream as files as it's pretty big
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.
The change you introduced is removing and adding properties.
The backward compatibility checks pass because:
- Removal of properties is considered backward compatible because downstream normalization is not destructive: the previously created column for this property won't be deleted
- The addition of properties will not break an existing catalog but will trigger schema validation errors that are not failing syncs.
@evantahler @sherifnada wdyt? Shall we make the backward compatibility test fail in this situation?
I think that the change you introduced are not functionally breaking changes but will lead to very messy destination schema after normalization.
I'd suggest you locally try a sync with 0.1.10
and then upgrade to 1.0.0:
- check if the sync succeeds
- check how the destination schema looks like
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.
I tracked this evolution in a issue: #20754
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.
just to clarify - any action item here to be done? does it still make sense to run a sync locally to look at the destination schema regarding we have decided to treat it as an incompatible change or may I resolve this thread?
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.
This will be affecting all cloud users with a Notion connection correct?
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.
@jnr0790 this will affect those users with Pages
stream enabled. I will post a list of them in the issue
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.
@davydov-d can you tag me and Erica on that comment cc @erica-airbyte
/test connector=connectors/source-notion
Build PassedTest summary info:
|
airbyte-integrations/connectors/source-notion/integration_tests/expected_records.txt
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@davydov-d Are there still any blockers for this PR? We recently saw this issue popped up today within our on-call and are curious if you can give an update since the code freeze has been lifted cc: @etsybaev |
/test connector=connectors/source-notion
Build FailedTest summary info:
|
@ryankfu sorry for the long delay - i have been on a sick leave. I'll sync with the TCS and deploy this change asap |
/test connector=connectors/source-notion
Build FailedTest summary info:
|
/test connector=connectors/source-notion
Build PassedTest summary info:
|
@davydov-d this is not been merged yet correct? I think we are waiting on a list of customers that this will affect that we need to reach out to before the change go to production. |
@erica-airbyte that's right, it is not merged yet. The list is here as Juan asked (I will take a look if something changed for the last three weeks and let you know in the issue) |
Sentry issue: CONNECTOR-INCIDENT-MANAGEMENT-SN |
/publish connector=connectors/source-notion
if you have connectors that successfully published but failed definition generation, follow step 4 here |
* #1047 oncall - Source Notion: fix Pages stream schema * #1047 oncall - Source Notion: fix Pages stream schema * #1047 oncall - Source Notion: upd changelog * #1047 source notion - remove ignored fields * #1047 source notion: fix SATs * #1047 source notion: upd expected records * auto-bump connector version Co-authored-by: Octavia Squidington III <octavia-squidington-iii@users.noreply.github.com>
What
https://github.com/airbytehq/oncall/issues/1047
#19777
How
high