-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
schemadiff
: analyze and report foreign key loops/cycles
#15062
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
7c76d8c
schemadiff: analyze foreign key loops
shlomi-noach 66ee6ab
No need to re-check cache
shlomi-noach bc019eb
ForeignKeyDependencyUnresolvedError does not need to indicate 'loop' …
shlomi-noach 2bd3f62
more complex test scenarios
shlomi-noach 1a4ed10
wording changes per review
shlomi-noach 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 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 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 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
Is it useful to have for each step in the loop also the column name? To more exactly identify the specific loop?
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'm afraid of clutter. The foreign key might reference multiple columns. It is indeed possible that same table
child
will reference tableparent
with two different foreign keys, one of which has a cycle, the other does not. In such case it would indeed be beneficial to identify the referenced columns both on parent and child; but again this is an amount of information that is likely to create much background noise. Alternatively, we could use the foreign key name participating in the loop.Either solution would complicate the loop detection logic only slightly; question is how useful vs. confusing would the information be.
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.
Just took a look at the code. The current approach (only report table name) is consistent with other
schemadiff
error reports, that suffice with table name or column name without drilling into specific details. I think this should be fine as it is for now.