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

'dict object' has no attribute 'type_timestamp' - DBT 1(.3.1?) incompatibility #40

Open
Startouf opened this issue Dec 9, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@Startouf
Copy link

Startouf commented Dec 9, 2022

Hello, I have the following errors when running the audit model hooks

06:20:22  Running with dbt=1.3.1
06:20:22  Partial parse save file not found. Starting full parse.
Compilation Error in model ml_gatling_train (models/ml/models/ml_gatling_train.sql)
  'dict object' has no attribute 'type_timestamp'
  
  > in macro model_audit (macros/hooks/model_audit.sql)
  > called by macro _audit_table_columns (macros/hooks/model_audit.sql)

I recall seeing a deprecation type_timestamp somewhere, it's now in dbt core

@Startouf
Copy link
Author

Startouf commented Dec 9, 2022

Here is the comment

14:21:54 Warning: the type_timestamp macro is now provided in dbt Core. It is no longer available in dbt_utils and backwards compatibility will be removed in a future version of the package. Use type_timestamp (no prefix) instead. The myjobglasses_alexandria.ml_gatling_train model triggered this warning.

I was using DBT 1.3 latest environment and since tuesday 2022-12-06 it started crashing in production

@Startouf
Copy link
Author

Startouf commented Dec 9, 2022

I have asked a question about this in the DBT slack there https://getdbt.slack.com/archives/C2JRRQDTL/p1670595938470359

@davidsr2r
Copy link
Contributor

Having the same issue, cannot upgrade to dbt 1.3 now. Maybe if this is marked as a bug report it'll get prioritised?

davidsr2r added a commit to davidsr2r/dbt_ml that referenced this issue Jan 6, 2023
Should fix the bug reported in: kristeligt-dagblad#40 as it's the recommended fix, but it should be checked.
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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants