-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.1k
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 Github: bugfix schemas for streams deployments
, workflow_runs
, teams
#15049
Merged
Merged
Changes from 6 commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
35f3d51
improve schemas
grubberr 6c949cb
github.md updated
grubberr 8dc57a8
revert TypeTransformer
grubberr 500fa97
Merge branch 'master' into grubberr/oncall-321-2-source-github
grubberr dbd6b2b
updated deployments schema added oneOf
grubberr 68c48fc
improve "additionalProperties": true
grubberr afba045
Merge branch 'master' into grubberr/oncall-321-2-source-github
grubberr c3e0abe
Merge branch 'master' into grubberr/oncall-321-2-source-github
grubberr f480c87
auto-bump connector version [ci skip]
octavia-squidington-iii File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
From https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/issues/15021,
oneOf, anyOf, and not should not be allowed in SAT
@sherifnada what's the actual effect of doing this?
This should probably just be a
string
typeThere 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.
Yes, I suspected this question
The problem is if remove this to multi-type, normalization will start to fail (at least destination-snowflake)
I need your approval to remove this multi-type !!!
The second point why I have re-implemented using
oneOf
instead of just simple["string", "object"]
because it's better handled by python TransformerThere 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.
Other words you can see here just refactoring of previous schema
but making it more compatible with python Transformer
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.
@grubberr whats the failure in normalization?
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.
something like this
https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/issues/15021#issuecomment-1196320638
In short, all multi-type(s) combinations usually stored as pure-JSON on destination
on some engine it's VARCHAR but it's not always
for example:
on snowflake - VARIANT type
on redshift - SUPER type
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.
Ah! Got it - sending a
string
would actually cause an error since they're currently already being handled asobject
s. Then in this case to avoid the breaking schema change, sincepayload
is an arbitrary object I think it's ok to make our own object with the string value.If we confirm that normalization/destinations are just handling this as an object, then we could update the schema here to be
["null", "object"]
(remove string). @grubberr you mentioned earlier that for validation this wouldn't be ok - what issues do we have with validation if we do this?In practice this should only be:
(if github docs are true to their word)
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.
@pedroslopez if we do such transformation
"string" -> {"value": "string"}
no issues with validation
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 asked earlier whether we were seeing an issue with this currently since, while we should fix these multi-type schemas, it seems like a separate issue from what's being addressed in this PR for the on call issue. Since it's on call, I think we should move forward with the current changes since it's behavior is equivaltent and address the schema issue / coercing strings into objects separately
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.
argh github keeps hiding previous comments before I post 😛
@grubberr if you have those changes made then feel free to include here or separately, up to you
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.
@pedroslopez no I did not do such changes
"string" -> {"value": "string"}
it's was only my discussion about possible solutions how to move forward to be compliant with this PR https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/issues/15021