Updates to Model Contracts (v1.5 betas) #3100
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
content
✅ Deploy Preview for docs-getdbt-com ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
github-actions
bot
added
the
size: large
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@matthewshaver I think this is ready for editorial review. There's one TODO that's really missing, which is proactively documenting some known limitations/caveats for constraints (things we chose to kick out of scope / not prioritize).
|
|
||
| ### For maintainers of adapter plugins | ||
|
|
||
| Coming soon: GH discussion detailing interface changes and offering a forum for Q&A | ||
| For more detailed information and to ask any questions, please visit [dbt-core/discussions/6624](https://github.com/dbt-labs/dbt-core/discussions/6624). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Stealing from #3052 - no reason to delay getting this info live
| @@ -53,9 +56,9 @@ More to come! | |||
| ::: | |||
|
|
|||
| ### Publishing models as APIs | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some of the nomenclature here is liable to change, as we go through formal internal naming process. No updates just yet / for this PR; I expect to be ready with those updates before the RC (April 13).
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| ## Example | ||
| ## Support |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a more-positive spin on "Limitations" :) but if you think that's a clearer way of expressing it, we can switch out one for the other (or for something else)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks good. Always more pleasing to the reader to put a positive spin on anything. "Don't apologize for keeping them waiting; thank them for their patience" type of experience.
| - `type`: one of `not_null`, `primary_key`, `foreign_key`, `check`, `custom` | ||
| - `expression`: text input to qualify the constraint |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- `type` (required): one of `not_null`, `primary_key`, `foreign_key`, `check`, `custom`
- `expression`: text input to qualify the constraint; required for certain constraint types, and optional for others
- `name` (optional): some data platforms support defining constraints with a human-friendly name
| To that end, there are two optional fields you can specify on any constraint: | ||
| - `warn_unenforced: False` to skip warning on constraints that are supported, but not enforced, by this data platform. The constraint will be included in templated DDL. | ||
| - `warn_unsupportedL: False` to skip warning on constraints that aren't supported by this data platform, and therefore won't be included in templated DDL. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TODO: document the limitations called out in #2945 (comment)
- no
refsupport forforeign_key/referencesconstraints- no standard support (yet) for platform-specific
relyinstructions, unless implemented for that platform specifically- no support for schema evolution in
incrementalmodels - adding/removing constraints as the column spec changes, during incremental runs
Co-authored-by: Jeremy Cohen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jeremy Cohen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jeremy Cohen <[email protected]>
resolves #2945
resolves #3023
What are you changing in this pull request and why?
Updates to docs on Model Contracts based on changes in:
Plus, some updates to the v1.5 upgrade guide. We should give this a full once-over before the RC on April 13, including links out to other related documentation changes.
cc @MichelleArk @matthewshaver I'm going to take another pass (later) in the morning :)