Refactoring migration assessment codepath #2137
Conversation
- goal is to eventually get rid of using issue reason for lookups
sanyamsinghal
force-pushed
the
sanyam/refactor-assess
branch
from
a35b70f to
a869cda
Compare
…n cmd for fetching issues
…in AssessmentReport struct
| @@ -100,7 +100,8 @@ type DBObject struct { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // TODO: support MinimumVersionsFixedIn in xml | |||
| type Issue struct { | |||
| type AnalyzeSchemaIssue struct { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe you have just changed the struct name, not the JSON field names, but have we tested YugabyteD to confirm if this change does not break anything?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
its the struct name only, not the fields. So json will be same.
We send payload(json) to ybd
| MigrationCaveats []UnsupportedFeature `json:"MigrationCaveats"` | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type AssessmentIssue struct { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@sanyamsinghal can you add comments to each field, giving an example of what they might look like?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Category - Feature, Migration Caveat. Query Constructs, Datatype
TypeName - Gin Indexes, Regex Functions, ...
TypeDescription - TODO: add if available or add for required ones
Impact: Last meeting we discuss it as Level-1, Level-2, Level-3... But i am thinking we can have it as Minor Moderate Significant also
ObjectType - it can be empty in some cases, for categories like unsupported datatypes thinking of the object type as datatype for eg: geometry
Basically thinking of the datatype as object type
We can discuss this more in next PR, for now i just defined a struct. @makalaaneesh
There was a problem hiding this comment.
got it, yeah just wanted you to add comments to code next to the field 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sure, will add.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@makalaaneesh let me know what do you think about
ObjectType - it can be empty in some cases, for categories like unsupported datatypes thinking of the object type as datatype for eg: geometry
Basically thinking of the datatype as object type
Describe the changes in this pull request
Just minor refactoring to restart with, please review commit by commit to get an idea of what all changes are done.
Describe if there are any user-facing changes
NA
How was this pull request tested?
Not required, existing is enough.
Does your PR have changes that can cause upgrade issues?