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

Ensure all the required fields are populated in the html report for new flattened issues approach #2190

Merged
merged 35 commits into from
Jan 21, 2025

Conversation

sanyamsinghal
Copy link
Collaborator

@sanyamsinghal sanyamsinghal commented Jan 16, 2025

Describe the changes in this pull request

This PR includes:

  • Having relevant value based on Issue field
  • Populating Description and Name in all query issues
  • Replacing AnalyzeSchemaIssue.Reason field to be equivalent QueryIssue.Description instead of QueryIssue.Name field
  • QueryIssue.Description will only contain dynamic information, rest all fields mostly will be static.
  • Detection issue in Callhome whose description have object info.
  • Fixed all the automation tests based on the new strings(reason/description etc)

Describe if there are any user-facing changes

nothing as such, only text has changed for some of the issue fields (reported in assess and analyze)

How was this pull request tested?

  • Fixing Existing tests to pass.
  • Verified the callhome payloads, on server side, to not have any sensitive info.

Does your PR have changes that can cause upgrade issues?

Component Breaking changes?
MetaDB No
Name registry json No
Data File Descriptor Json No
Export Snapshot Status Json No
Import Data State No
Export Status Json No
Data .sql files of tables No
Export and import data queue No
Schema Dump No
AssessmentDB No
Sizing DB No
Migration Assessment Report Json No
Callhome Json No
YugabyteD Tables No
TargetDB Metadata Tables No

@sanyamsinghal sanyamsinghal self-assigned this Jan 16, 2025
@sanyamsinghal
Copy link
Collaborator Author

sanyamsinghal commented Jan 16, 2025

@sanyamsinghal sanyamsinghal marked this pull request as ready for review January 17, 2025 08:16
@sanyamsinghal sanyamsinghal requested review from priyanshi-yb and makalaaneesh and removed request for priyanshi-yb January 17, 2025 08:16
migtests/scripts/functions.sh Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/cmd/analyzeSchema.go Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/cmd/analyzeSchema.go Show resolved Hide resolved
issue.Reason = strings.Split(issue.Reason, "on column -")[0]
default:
issue.Reason = sensitiveReason
if strings.HasPrefix(issue.Reason, sensitiveReason) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

pls test this logic manually once with callhome. @priyanshi-yb has a server that you can use to easily test.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

verified.

yb-voyager/cmd/assessMigrationCommand.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/cmd/assessMigrationCommand.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/cmd/assessMigrationCommand.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -1235,7 +1237,7 @@ func fetchUnsupportedPlPgSQLObjects(schemaAnalysisReport utils.SchemaReport) []U
})
}
feature := UnsupportedFeature{
FeatureName: reason,
FeatureName: issueName,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This will have callhome/yugabyted implications, no? Do you want to keep it the same now (set it to reason), and we can discuss this later when dealing with callhome/yugabyted?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The issue with grouping by reason(/description) anymore is that it is dynamic(%ss), having column info etc..

There will be new unnecessary groups if we go that route for different value of %s in each case.

yb-voyager/src/query/queryissue/issues_ddl.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/src/query/queryissue/issues_ddl.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/src/query/queryissue/issues_ddl.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/src/query/queryissue/issues_ddl.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/src/query/queryissue/issues_ddl.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/cmd/assessMigrationCommand.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/cmd/analyzeSchema.go Show resolved Hide resolved
yb-voyager/src/query/queryissue/issues_ddl.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@sanyamsinghal sanyamsinghal force-pushed the sanyam/vet-assessment-issues branch from d6f6608 to 62d82c7 Compare January 20, 2025 19:31
Copy link
Collaborator

@makalaaneesh makalaaneesh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@sanyamsinghal sanyamsinghal merged commit d2aa0ad into main Jan 21, 2025
67 checks passed
@sanyamsinghal sanyamsinghal deleted the sanyam/vet-assessment-issues branch January 21, 2025 08:58
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.

3 participants