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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add table option to copy sink #6819

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 14, 2019
Merged

Add table option to copy sink #6819

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 14, 2019

Conversation

qingyhe
Copy link
Contributor

@qingyhe qingyhe commented Jul 31, 2019

Latest improvements:

MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.

Contribution checklist:

  • I have reviewed the documentation for the workflow.
  • Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.
  • The OpenAPI Hub was used for checking validation status and next steps.

ARM API Review Checklist

  • Service team MUST add the "WaitForARMFeedback" label if the management plane API changes fall into one of the below categories.
  • adding/removing APIs.
  • adding/removing properties.
  • adding/removing API-version.
  • adding a new service in Azure.

Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs.

  • If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged urgently, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.
    Please follow the link to find more details on API review process.

@openapi-sdkautomation
Copy link

openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jul 31, 2019 •
edited
Loading

In Testing, Please Ignore

[Logs] (Generated from f6874e2, Iteration 1)

Succeeded Python: Azure/azure-sdk-for-python [Logs] [Diff]
Failed Java: Azure/azure-sdk-for-java [Logs] [Diff]
Warning Go: test-repo-billy/azure-sdk-for-go [Logs] [Diff]
In-Progress JavaScript: Azure/azure-sdk-for-js [Logs]
  • Package generation in progress.

@azuresdkci azuresdkci requested a review from erich-wang July 31, 2019 13:04
@AutorestCI AutorestCI mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2019
Closed
@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jul 31, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

A PR has been created for you based on this PR content.

Once this PR will be merged, content will be added to your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#5747

@azuresdkci
Copy link
Contributor

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@AutorestCI AutorestCI mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2019
Closed
@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jul 31, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

A PR has been created for you based on this PR content.

Once this PR will be merged, content will be added to your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#5507

@openapi-sdkautomation openapi-sdkautomation bot mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2019
Merged
@erich-wang erich-wang added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Aug 1, 2019
ravbhatnagar
ravbhatnagar reviewed Aug 7, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@ravbhatnagar ravbhatnagar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@qingyhe one comment, please take a look.

...tafactory/resource-manager/Microsoft.DataFactory/stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json
@@ -2591,6 +2591,10 @@
"maxConcurrentConnections": {
"type": "object",
"description": "The maximum concurrent connection count for the sink data store. Type: integer (or Expression with resultType integer)."
},
"tableOption": {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

New writable properties should go in a new api-version. what is the impact of this value being set via portal, resource retrieved via an existing SDK which ignores this value since it doesn't understand it. Now the user sends a PUT on the existing resource from the SDK but the request body doesn't contain this. what happens to the value of this property on the server.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • What is the impact of this value being set via portal：
    The table in the target side will auto create for copy job.

  • What happens to the value of this property on the server if request body doesn't contain this:
    the default value is none.

This is a very common qestion for new release feature and backword compatiable
@hvermis help to explain the ADF SDK behavior.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The SDK will ignore it if it doesn't know about it. We keep updating our SDKs frequently to keep and ask our customers to get the latest version. We also align new features in our UI with our SDK releases, and our customers know that if they use both, they need to get the latest SDK.
This actually a downside of Autorest - it should have kept original properties instead of discarding them, but that is a different topic.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@hvermis - you do realize that this is contrary to the Microsoft Rest API guidelines which are publicly available? Please check it here - https://github.com/microsoft/api-guidelines/blob/vNext/Guidelines.md#123-definition-of-a-breaking-change
paragraph 2 sentence 2 in the above section.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@ravbhatnagar Yes, we are aware. However those guidelines are not scalable - we always need to add new properties to our APIs and models, and adding new API version every time is not feasible.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@ravbhatnagar Do you have any other question? Can you help to approve this PR?

@ravbhatnagar ravbhatnagar added the ARMChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when require changes after ARM review label Aug 7, 2019
@ravbhatnagar
Copy link
Contributor

As discussed in the in person meeting, this is a breaking change as per the current Microsoft REST API guideline for Azure. The scenario is understood on why its not feasible for service team to keep reving the api-version for every such change.
This needs to be closed with MarkRuss and JohnGos. GauravBh will provide a write up for review and use ADF as a use case.
For now, signing off on this from ARM side.

@ravbhatnagar ravbhatnagar added ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review and removed ARMChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when require changes after ARM review WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Aug 14, 2019
@erich-wang erich-wang merged commit 228655d into Azure:master Aug 14, 2019
@yaohaizh yaohaizh mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2019
Merged
5 tasks
leni-msft pushed a commit to leni-msft/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request May 13, 2022
@arikt-ms
Add listKeys API to stable version (Azure#6819)
a986668 
* add a new version copying 2022-02-15

* change version to 2022-04-03

* updating readme.

* Adding listKeys API.

* fixing validation errors.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@hvermis hvermis hvermis left review comments

@ravbhatnagar ravbhatnagar ravbhatnagar left review comments

@erich-wang erich-wang erich-wang approved these changes

Assignees

@erich-wang erich-wang

Labels
ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@qingyhe @AutorestCI @azuresdkci @ravbhatnagar @erich-wang @hvermis