-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
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
Twilio numeric fields cast as strings #7
Comments
thank you 🙌 |
so, we need to investigate the following tables' fields, which are coming in from the connector as varchars/strings but sound (and look) like they should be numeric types:
i'll talk to the data PMs to understand why this might be the case from the connector-side of things, but otherwise this would be straightforward to implement ion the package. in the final CTE of each staging model we'd wanna cast each of these fields as a |
I already got some answers from Fivetran support. Apparently this is because the specifications provided by Twilio for their API is that these are provided as strings. So it seems maybe there are circumstances under which the API might return non-numeric answers?? I'm just not sure that is enough of a reason to compromise the ease with which to perform analysis using these models. I imagine many will need to add a casting operator in their project if it's not part of this package. |
Yeah I do see that Twiliio lists these fields as strings in the API Docs, but I completely agree with you that the fields are really only valuable as actual numerics. Going to investigate some more and will report back 🫡 |
@raphaelvarieras We're currently trying to get in contact with Twilio to get some clarification on these fields, but it could be helpful for you to open a case with Twilio directly as well, as they might prioritize getting to customer questions over partner ones. |
So finally got some answers (somewhat) from Twilio:
With this, I think the package can safely apply the below updates in the relevant staging models:
@raphaelvarieras We'll plan ot take this on next sprint, which starts 6/13, but if you have availability to open a PR we will happily review and merge before then! |
Thanks @fivetran-jamie and @raphaelvarieras for the context and scoping, will start working on an update to the package |
Thanks @raphaelvarieras! This has been addressed in our latest release. |
Originally posted by @fivetran-jamie in #6 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: