refactor: Include id in Record response
#2156
Merged
Conversation
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
|
The change to |
Sure. That's what the |
|
@jianxiangxun @Jesse-Bakker are we merging this? |
|
All things about dozer library have been done. |
jianxiangxun
approved these changes
Oct 26, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Previously we only include record
versioninmessage Record, and the recordidwas returned in yet anothermessage RecordWithId. It was because of legacy reasons that don't exist anymore.In this PR, we include
idinmessage Recordand removemessage RecordWithId. The same change is applied on both common and typed APIs.We also made a small change to
ingest.proto: instead of takingRecordwe now takerepeated Value, because ingestion doesn't care about record id or version.