-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 209
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: Add a level of record abstraction #380
refactor: Add a level of record abstraction #380
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Andrew <andrjc4@vt.edu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew <andrjc4@vt.edu>
hey @AndrewCiambrone , thanks for the pr, has been a busy week..Do you think you could fix the conflict and CI? I would like to use the branch to do a quick lyft staging test. thanks a lot! |
ping @AndrewCiambrone , I think this generic is super useful if we would like to support neptune in databuilder. Let us know if you have the chance to update the pr and I would like to do a quick test in our staging as well. cc @allisonsuarez in case I don't have a chance to test it. |
Hey @feng-tao sorry its been a busy week. I will pull in the latest changes tomorrow. |
Signed-off-by: Andrew <andrjc4@vt.edu>
thanks for the rebase! |
just did a quick staging test with the pr with a few tasks and it runs fine so far :) I will look at the pr in more detail tomorrow and may ask questions as well, thanks for the great work! |
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 try to go through every line, but overall, I think the change lgtm and it is well written! Once the conflict is fixed, we could merge it ! thanks.
|
||
|
||
class ColumnMetadata: | ||
COLUMN_NODE_LABEL = 'Column' | ||
COLUMN_KEY_FORMAT = '{db}://{cluster}.{schema}/{tbl}/{col}' | ||
COLUMN_NAME = 'name' | ||
COLUMN_TYPE = 'type' | ||
COLUMN_ORDER = 'sort_order{}'.format(UNQUOTED_SUFFIX) # int value needs to be unquoted when publish to neo4j |
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.
hey @AndrewCiambrone , I think we still need to keep this? or i miss the fix somewhere else?
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.
nvm, I see the latter part
I end up to fix the merge conflict |
@AndrewCiambrone given the change is complete, could you remove the WIP? or let me know if there are any models that haven't done the refactors. For amundsen-io/rfcs#5, do you plan to implement the Neptune serializer as part of the same RFC? |
If no new models were added in the last rebase I believe every model is accounted for. As for the RFC I felt like they were two separate topics so I was planning on writing a second rfc for the Neptune databuilder. |
thanks @AndrewCiambrone ! |
When I run
I haven't been able to debug it further, any ideas? |
Summary of Changes
RFC: amundsen-io/rfcs#5
Tests
I modified all the model tests to incorporate the new serializable functionality.
Documentation
What documentation did you add or modify and why? Add any relevant links then remove this line
CheckList
Make sure you have checked all steps below to ensure a timely review.
make test