Skip to content

feat: add preflight checks for transform#736

Open
katie-perry wants to merge 2 commits intostagingfrom
cli-troubleshooting
Open

feat: add preflight checks for transform#736
katie-perry wants to merge 2 commits intostagingfrom
cli-troubleshooting

Conversation

@katie-perry
Copy link
Contributor

I was having some issues yesterday when I was trying to run transform and lost more time than I'd like to admit because I didn't realize I had some environment variables misconfigured (or forgot to set them at all). The transform will fully run, taking a few minutes, leading a dev to believe it's working properly, just to arrive at the end with an empty db and silent failures.

This code was debug code for myself, but I decided to open this PR in case it might be helpful to add to the cli. Everything should work the same as before (I think. I didn't verify with the OG way of having the normalizers stood up on a local ddb instance) but with initial checks and probes before moving on.

One thing I'm not super sure on is the pydantic version issue. It seems super niche to be including in the code like this, so I might end up taking that out. I'll comment on it to bring attention.

I'm also unsure about exposing the errors - it seems like there's existing patterns in place to silence/log errors. When I was trying this out yesterday, though, I didn't see any errors logged to metakb.log when I was running the transform.

@katie-perry katie-perry self-assigned this Feb 26, 2026
@katie-perry katie-perry added the priority:low Low priority label Feb 26, 2026
@katie-perry katie-perry requested a review from a team as a code owner February 26, 2026 20:12
@katie-perry katie-perry added the chore Changes that do not relate to a fix or feature and don't modify src or test files label Feb 26, 2026
"Known symptom: AttributeError involving `ValidationInfo` and "
"`warnings`.\n"
"Try pinning pydantic below 2.12 in this environment, e.g.:\n"
' pip install "pydantic<2.12"'
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is the weird issue I ran into yesterday that I talked about in the description. I don't really like having this specific in here (I'll likely end up removing it) but left it in for now to call attention to this - should we be pinning a specific pydantic version between the metakb and normalizer repos? The difference in versions I had between metakb and variation normalizer was calling a failure. Matching my metakb pydantic version to the one in var-norm fixed it.

I'm wondering if I should've looked more into it and created a discussion or a ticket...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

chore Changes that do not relate to a fix or feature and don't modify src or test files priority:low Low priority

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant