-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 68
[ADD] util/update_table_from_dict #297
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
Open
Pirols
wants to merge
1
commit into
odoo:master
Choose a base branch
from
odoo-dev:master-add_update_table_from_dict-pied
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
I would also like to have a validation of the
mapping
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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 want to keep
key_col
and limit its potential targets to integer columns or remove it entirely?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.
I think
key_col
should always be anint
, but I like to have it variable. It would allow to update a table based in a FK instead of a PK. To decide you can grep the repo and see if we currently use the dict trick for other columns thanid
... I think we did but my memory could betray me.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.
From a relatively quick search I found 4 usages of the json trick on columns other than
id
: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.
OK, then maybe it's worth taking the type from the
key_col
in the table directly.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.
That should not be necessary since
JSONB_EACH
returns the key as a text1.Unless we want to validate the type of the keys of
mapping
. In which case I would need to define (or reuse, if already available) a mapping from pg types to python types. Wdyt?Footnotes
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/functions-json.html#FUNCTIONS-JSON-PROCESSING-TABLE ↩
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.
Well I just noticed you are casting the key_col to text before comparing with the actual json dict key, then it's fine. :) What I had in mind was casting the dict key to the column type. In principle my suggestion was to block/fail if we get an invalid json dict (incompatible with the table), I have no strong opinion against current approach TBH. @KangOl wdyt?