-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32
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
update/get-ticket-property-history-columns #126
update/get-ticket-property-history-columns #126
Conversation
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.
@fivetran-catfritz thanks for this quick turnaround! I just have a few small comments. Let me know if you want to sync on any of these comments.
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.
Thanks @fivetran-joemarkiewicz. I have made this breaking and removed the staleness workflow.
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 a few small suggestions. Otherwise this looks great!
Co-authored-by: Joe Markiewicz <[email protected]>
@@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ models: | |||
description: '{{ doc("_fivetran_synced") }}' | |||
- name: _fivetran_start | |||
description: The (UTC DATETIME) to keep track of the time when a record is first created or modified in the source database. | |||
- name: _fivetran_end |
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.
We should probably add this to the src_hubspot.yml
as well. It looks as if _fivetran_start
is not in the src_hubspot.yml
either.
integration_tests/dbt_project.yml
Outdated
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.
_fivetran_start
and _fivetran_end
are not present in the ticket_property_history
seed file. Should we add those in with the proper data?
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.
@fivetran-catfritz Looks mostly good! A few comments before approving.
(cc: @fivetran-joemarkiewicz if you are taking this on.)
- Update documentation to include `_fivetran_end` under model `stg_hubspot__ticket_property_history`. | ||
|
||
## Under the hood | ||
- Updated the maintainer PR template to the current format. |
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.
Let's add a note that we are adding integration testing for Databricks SQL Warehouse.
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.
@fivetran-joemarkiewicz One minor changelog note but approved!
PR Overview
This PR will address the following Issue/Feature:
_fivetran_end
, which should be brought in throughstg_hubspot__ticket_property_history
, is used downstream inint_hubspot__daily_ticket_history
. It only creates an issue if the field is not present, which for most users would never be the case. I only discovered this since I was using theticket_property_history_data
seed from the source, which is different from the seed in the transform, which has this field.stg_hubspot__ticket_property_history
relies on the macro for the missing fields, adding_fivetran_end
resolves the issue.This PR will result in the following new package version:
Please provide the finalized CHANGELOG entry which details the relevant changes included in this PR:
PR Checklist
Basic Validation
Please acknowledge that you have successfully performed the following commands locally:
dbt run (if incremental models are present) && dbt testBefore marking this PR as "ready for review" the following have been applied:
Detailed Validation
Please share any and all of your validation steps:
If you had to summarize this PR in an emoji, which would it be?
💃