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

Implement FKSearch #131

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: jharkhand
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

shashwatm1111
Copy link

@shashwatm1111 shashwatm1111 commented Jun 12, 2023

Implemented Fksearch on data as part of C4GT issue. #63

Implemented Fksearch on a sample data. Added a sample test and git expected output. Though need to figure out on how to apply in cqube dataset
@@ -11,7 +12,11 @@ export async function readCSV(filePath: string): Promise<string[][]> {
.createReadStream(filePath)
.pipe(csv({ separator: ',', headers: false, quote: "'" }))
.on('data', (data) => {
rows.push(Object.values(data));
const rowValues: string[] = Object.values(data);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what is this doing?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

how is this logic ensuring that case insesitivity is achieved? What if the dimensions table has a value "CQUBE" and caseSensitiveFKSearch flag is set to false and then the CSV has cqube, ideally as per the issue description this case should pass whereas in my understanding with the implementation in this PR, it will fail. Am I missing something here?

Copy link
Collaborator

@techsavvyash techsavvyash left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Also, kindly change the base branch of this PR.

@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
{
"globals": {
"onlyCreateWhitelisted": true
"onlyCreateWhitelisted": true,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

don't let the onlyCreateWhiteList changes come into this PR.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Oct 28, 2024

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 5643721587

Details

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at 0.0%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 5228383548: 0.0%
Covered Lines: 0
Relevant Lines: 0

💛 - Coveralls

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants