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

Correct Schema::check_compatible to resolve types in a ModuleDef #1813

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 10, 2024

Conversation

kazimuth
Copy link
Contributor

@kazimuth kazimuth commented Oct 9, 2024

Description of Changes

When performing an automatic migration, we check the old moduledef is compatible with the data stored in the system tables.
But right now, the types stored in the system tables are resolved, but the types in the moduledef are not. So the check breaks on nested types. This PR fixes that and adds a regression test for it.

I'd like to do a followup PR adding more intensive automigration testing.

Expected complexity level and risk

0

Testing

Added a failing test, fixed the test.

@kazimuth kazimuth requested review from bfops and gefjon October 9, 2024 17:55
@bfops
Copy link
Collaborator

bfops commented Oct 9, 2024

This fixes the issue for me! I don't really understand the context around this code but seems like an improvement.

Copy link
Contributor

@cloutiertyler cloutiertyler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I do understand the context, and this LGTM. Thank you for the regression test as well.

@kazimuth kazimuth added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 10, 2024
Merged via the queue into master with commit 37087c2 Oct 10, 2024
8 checks passed
bfops pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 15, 2024
bfops pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants