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

parse group config on groupable nodes #6965

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Feb 23, 2023
Merged

Conversation

MichelleArk
Copy link
Contributor

@MichelleArk MichelleArk commented Feb 14, 2023

resolves #6823

Description

Checklist

@cla-bot cla-bot bot added the cla:yes label Feb 14, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for your pull request! We could not find a changelog entry for this change. For details on how to document a change, see the contributing guide.

@MichelleArk MichelleArk changed the base branch from CT-1989/parse-group-resource to main February 14, 2023 04:56
@MichelleArk MichelleArk changed the base branch from main to CT-1989/parse-group-resource February 14, 2023 04:56
@MichelleArk MichelleArk marked this pull request as ready for review February 15, 2023 04:41
@MichelleArk MichelleArk requested review from a team as code owners February 15, 2023 04:41
@MichelleArk MichelleArk requested review from gshank, VersusFacit, emmyoop and peterallenwebb and removed request for VersusFacit February 15, 2023 04:41
Copy link
Contributor

@gshank gshank left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks good so far. I do have a couple of questions-- Are we going to "promote" the group config to node level in update_node_config? Are generic tests actually going to be able to be assigned to groups? I'm wondering if it might not make more sense for generic tests to belong to the group of the node they're attached to.

@jtcohen6
Copy link
Contributor

I'm wondering if it might not make more sense for generic tests to belong to the group of the node they're attached to.

Agreed! This also makes sense given ref restrictions we're putting in place in #6826

@MichelleArk MichelleArk mentioned this pull request Feb 15, 2023
6 tasks
Base automatically changed from CT-1989/parse-group-resource to main February 15, 2023 21:49
@MichelleArk MichelleArk requested review from a team and aranke February 15, 2023 21:49
Copy link
Member

@aranke aranke left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Few comments to make this more Pythonic

core/dbt/parser/manifest.py Show resolved Hide resolved
core/dbt/parser/manifest.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
core/dbt/parser/manifest.py Show resolved Hide resolved
core/dbt/parser/manifest.py Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@aranke aranke left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Discussed offline, keeping this pattern for now.

@MichelleArk
Copy link
Contributor Author

MichelleArk commented Feb 22, 2023

@gshank - Could you please take another look? Made some changes since the last review:

  • attached node lookup via ref_lookup and disabled_lookup: 0712181
  • added group_map to manifest for scheduling nodes in deleted groups for partial parsing: 43b8d09

@MichelleArk MichelleArk reopened this Feb 23, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@gshank gshank left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good!

I see what you meant about combining the ref_lookup and disabled. This actually feels like a somewhat better solution than in other places where it's two separate lookups.

@MichelleArk MichelleArk merged commit 5ddd408 into main Feb 23, 2023
@MichelleArk MichelleArk deleted the CT-1991/groupable-nodes branch February 23, 2023 19:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[CT-1991] Parse group config on 'groupable' nodes
5 participants