feat(joins): added dataset and columns registry#127
Conversation
GowthamTG
changed the title
GowthamTG
force-pushed
the
feat/datasets_registry
branch
from
ceec035 to
37d25ff
Compare
| sourceType: ColumnType, | ||
| targetType: ColumnType | ||
| ): number { | ||
| return this['getTypeCompatibilityScore'](sourceType, targetType); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
any reason for the 'getTypeCompatibilityScore' syntax?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes as it a private method I am not able to access it directly via this
This is only done to test the funtion
| if (compatibility.totalScore === 0) { | ||
| throw new Error('Columns are not compatible for joining'); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
are we computing the join path here? Should not just join based on whatever the user has selected?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure if we actually require this funtion because as soon as the user selects some column form the findCompatibleColumns function the consumer would have the join path
{
sourceDatasetId: string;
sourceColumnName: string;
destinationDatasetId: string;
destinationColumnName: string;
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have removed the same will add in future
| }); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public doesJoinPathExist({ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should this return the joinPath if it exists, otherwise undefined? Would be more reusable that way
| typeScore, | ||
| nameScore, | ||
| schemaScore, | ||
| totalScore: typeScore + nameScore + schemaScore, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
generally if the values can be derived from the return type, then there is not need to precompute it. totalScore is already represented by the returned values of typeScore, nameScore, schemaScore,
package.json
Outdated
| "duckdb": "^0.10.2", | ||
| "express": "^4.19.2", | ||
| "fake-indexeddb": "^5.0.1", | ||
| "fast-deep-equal": "3.1.3", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
are we using this anywhere?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes I am using this to check if the columns schema is same for any two columns
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we. use lodash instead?
|
Can we also update the meerkat-core and meerkat-browser version |
| @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ | |||
| import * as deepEqual from 'fast-deep-equal'; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is is possible to use lodash.deepEqual?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lodash deepEqal is way slow compared to this.
In web repo aswell we have been using the same
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since we already have the package, i dont want to add another one for just fast equals, we can change the package if it become a bottleneck in the future, for now lodash should be fine
| export interface Column<T = object> { | ||
| name: string; | ||
| dataType: ColumnType; | ||
| schema?: T; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should schema have a defined type?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Schema for us to would be DevRevSchema but for other consumer it might not be the same thats why we have defined it as configurable. Like they might follow their own filter format
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IMO defined type would be better here. Do we have functional support for handling generics?
|
|
||
| export interface Column<T = object> { | ||
| name: string; | ||
| dataType: ColumnType; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
column shuold be just DimensionType right?
GowthamTG
force-pushed
the
feat/datasets_registry
branch
from
448649b to
09ed48c
Compare
GowthamTG
force-pushed
the
feat/datasets_registry
branch
from
1f3740b to
206ffbb
Compare
3 participants
This DatasetRegistry and ColumnCompatibilityAnalyzer functions should help us to power joins and show column suggestions based on schema