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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
feat: only ingest key-ed value in additional header column #14628
feat: only ingest key-ed value in additional header column #14628
Changes from 10 commits
4aae804
c62e98f
c5d4197
7cfbb15
89dc44f
205b89a
0d07a66
d7c94ef
be58ada
735dbba
054cf0e
626be23
650f831
01f2116
2c0dbd0
9540879
8b715b4
4c3b96a
b7310ff
8cba0b9
f00632a
c296e8d
f9f4df5
dc2f42e
37570d1
8528acb
bea93b9
372988d
6653119
d0053d5
9c1d2f8
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
additional_column_type
is included in 1.6, but not documented.#14215 (comment)
Why do we need to deprecate this field here?
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.
Oh, for source created in 1.6, it will have
AdditionalColumnType::NORMAL
. So we cannot change the type for field9
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.
Have we told any poc user to try
include
before? We might need to tell them to rebuild the sources later. Or maybe we just document this breaking change in the release note.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.
Yes, the code is in v1.6.0 but the feature but not considered as released. It is ok to ignore the non-normal columns.
And I don't want to make breaking changes to normal columns here so I choose to use a new field.
I want to make things flexible when handling additional columns. Just like this change, the prev enum is not sufficient with handling an extra inner field arg. I don't know what comes next, so I make all columns a message instead of an enum.
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.
The breaking change looks acceptable to me, although it seems not hard to make it backward compatible.
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.
Do we need to add a new
ColumnDescVersion
? TBH I'm not sure about why it's added, and it doesn't seem to be needed here. Ask just in case.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.
the field is introduced in #13707 to deal with
DEFAULT_KEY_COLUMN_NAME
change in future.discussions are available here #13707 (comment)