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

revert _timestamp field name changes #42

Conversation

fivetran-jamie
Copy link
Contributor

Are you a current Fivetran customer?

fivetran made PR

What change(s) does this PR introduce?

  • reverts some changes i made in Update field selection, etc #40. i noticed we were changing some timestamp column names from *_at to *_timestamp and decided to not do this for consistency. however, this introduced quite a few downstream errors in the transform package (and shopify holistic reporting). i don't think it's worth it to make this change, so this PR reverts what i did

Did you update the CHANGELOG?

  • Yes

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

  • Yes (please provide breaking change details below.)
  • No (please provide an explanation as to how the change is non-breaking below.)

this AVOIDS a breaking change

Did you update the dbt_project.yml files with the version upgrade (please leverage standard semantic versioning)? (In both your main project and integration_tests)

  • Yes

Is this PR in response to a previously created Bug or Feature Request

  • Yes, Issue/Feature [link bug/feature number here]
  • No

How did you test the PR changes?

  • Buildkite
  • Local (please provide additional testing details below)

Select which warehouse(s) were used to test the PR

  • BigQuery
  • Redshift
  • Snowflake
  • Postgres
  • Databricks
  • Other (provide details below)

Provide an emoji that best describes your current mood

🐖

Feedback

We are so excited you decided to contribute to the Fivetran community dbt package! We continue to work to improve the packages and would greatly appreciate your feedback on our existing dbt packages or what you'd like to see next.

Copy link
Contributor

@fivetran-avinash fivetran-avinash left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@fivetran-jamie looks good, just some clarifying questions!

@@ -41,12 +41,6 @@
- Dependencies on `fivetran/fivetran_utils` have been upgraded, previously `[">=0.3.0", "<0.4.0"]` now `[">=0.4.0", "<0.5.0"]`.

[PR #40](https://github.com/fivetran/dbt_shopify_source/pull/40) includes the following breaking changes:
- In the following tables, `*_timestamp` columns have been renamed to `*_at` for consistency:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Was a bit confused looking at PR #40, I didn't see the timestamp renaming? Was this merged in an earlier PR?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah so we currently rename these fields in main - https://github.com/fivetran/dbt_shopify_source/blob/main/macros/staging_columns.sql#L5

in my previous PR, i removed the alias when i moved around the staging column macros

- `stg_shopify__order`
- `stg_shopify__product_variant`
- `stg_shopify__product`
- `stg_shopify__transaction`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Was there a reason we just changed these tables to the timestamp format? I see some others still in the _at format. https://github.com/fivetran/dbt_shopify_source/blob/feature/package-revamp/models/stg_shopify__refund.sql

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

not that i can tell, it seems like a stylistic choice Dylan made for the most pertinent timestamp columns

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah got it!

@fivetran-jamie fivetran-jamie merged commit cfabfb9 into feature/package-revamp Dec 28, 2022
@fivetran-jamie fivetran-jamie mentioned this pull request Jan 31, 2023
14 tasks
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.

2 participants