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

Hash row validation fails for MySQL on field that is successfully validated with --comparison-fields #819

Closed
helensilva14 opened this issue Apr 26, 2023 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
priority: p0 Highest priority. Critical issue. Will be fixed prior to next release. type: feature request 'Nice-to-have' improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.

Comments

@helensilva14
Copy link
Contributor

[Problem externally pointed out by an user]

When I use the --comparison-fields flag on a single date field. The comparison is successful. When I use the --hash flag on the same single field, it fails. I think this is because the big query side of things is doing a format but not doing the same format on the source. Is there a workaround for this?

@helensilva14
Copy link
Contributor Author

On timestamp columns, we do a strftime() to make sure the formatting between source/target match. I think this isn't registered for MySQL yet.

We'll need to add this to third_party/ibis/ibis_addon/operations.py to register the function:

MySQLExprTranslator._registry[ops.Strftime] = fixed_arity(sa.func.date_format, 2)

@helensilva14 helensilva14 added the type: feature request 'Nice-to-have' improvement, new feature or different behavior or design. label Apr 26, 2023
@nehanene15 nehanene15 added the priority: p0 Highest priority. Critical issue. Will be fixed prior to next release. label Apr 26, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
priority: p0 Highest priority. Critical issue. Will be fixed prior to next release. type: feature request 'Nice-to-have' improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants