This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 13, 2023. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 159
feat: update lambda state machine to accommodate tenantId #367
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
instead of doing glue side filtering would it be better to have a secondary index on the tenantId? This will become an expensive operation if we have to scan across all tenants
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.
Emm that's a great question. In the design doc, it specified the filtering is to be done as part of the Glue job, and secondary index was not introduced for any tables. @carvantes Any thoughts?
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.
The glue job always scans the entire DDB table no matter what, there's no way to use a query. This is a limitation on the current AWS Glue + DDB integration.
There are existing scenarios where this is far from ideal. e.g. exporting a single FHIR resource type or exporting the resources modified in the last hour will both scan the entire table.
There is room for improvement on the bulk export solution, but we are not changing the fundamentals here.