-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 122
feat(etl-api): validate unsupported column types #460
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
feat(etl-api): validate unsupported column types #460
Conversation
|
@codex review |
|
Thanks for the contribution, I will review it as soon as I get to it! |
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.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| name: "test_publication".to_string(), | ||
| tables: vec![], | ||
| }; | ||
| app.create_publication(&tenant_id, source_id, &publication) | ||
| .await; |
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.
delete_publication_succeeds never sets up a valid publication
This test now builds a publication request with tables: vec![], but the new validate_publication helper rejects empty table lists (lines 319‑340 in the handler), so the setup call returns 400 and no publication is created. Because delete_publication issues DROP PUBLICATION IF EXISTS, the delete and subsequent 404 read both succeed even when deletion of an existing publication is broken, so the test no longer exercises the real success path. Populate the publication with at least one table before deleting so the scenario is meaningful.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Fixes #34
What is the new behavior?
Added: