-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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
CDK: add support for streams with state attribute #9746
Merged
Merged
Changes from 7 commits
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
4af2863
add support for streams with state attribute
eugene-kulak ba112bf
update CHANGELOG.md
eugene-kulak 0c8ace9
fix setup.py
eugene-kulak 6b4fe0e
bump version
eugene-kulak c8de285
format
eugene-kulak 65ccd39
fix pre-commit and format
eugene-kulak 7258c89
format
eugene-kulak 56abd92
update state attribute docs and logic
eugene-kulak d2d95ca
format
eugene-kulak 2f1da1d
update docs
eugene-kulak 7f50a8d
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into keu/cdk-add-state-v2
eugene-kulak 4ecfb24
fix after merge
eugene-kulak 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@ | ||
# Changelog | ||
|
||
## 0.1.48 | ||
Add support for streams with explicit state attribute. | ||
|
||
## 0.1.47 | ||
Fix typing errors. | ||
|
||
|
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
@keu could we maintain the invariant that the state output from this method is always the same as
stream.state
? I think the only thing I'm concerned about is that if I define bothstream.state
andget_updated_state
then there are two potentially different states floating around which will lead to confusing behavior.Can we always maintain the invariant that whatever is stored in
stream.state
contains the state object being output?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.
@sherifnada I'm not sure how we can achieve this,
_checkpoint_state
will always return value fromstream.state
if there is any, if not it will fallback to the state obtained fromget_updated_state
,so what is the problem here?
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.
so the contract is
IncrementalMixin
implementation always takes precedence overget_updated_state
? sounds fine w me.Should we add this to the docs?
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.
sure, will do