Materialize assets without running checks #16460
Conversation
|
Current dependencies on/for this PR:
This comment was auto-generated by Graphite. |
johannkm
force-pushed
the
johann/09-12-Materialize_assets_without_running_checks
branch
from
cef7310 to
bc7f38d
Compare
johannkm
force-pushed
the
johann/09-12-Materialize_assets_without_running_checks
branch
from
bc7f38d to
624bddd
Compare
| graphql_context, | ||
| "asset_check_job", | ||
| asset_selection=[{"path": ["asset_1"]}], | ||
| asset_check_selection=[], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
existing None coverage is sufficient?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah we test it in test_launch_subset_asset_and_included_check
|
I'll let @alangenfeld handle this one |
johannkm
force-pushed
the
johann/09-12-Materialize_assets_without_running_checks
branch
from
624bddd to
4ccbc21
Compare
johannkm
deleted the
johann/09-12-Materialize_assets_without_running_checks
branch
|
Deploy preview for dagster-university ready! ✅ Preview Built with commit 4ccbc21. |
|
Deploy preview for dagit-core-storybook ready! ✅ Preview Built with commit 4ccbc21. |
|
Deploy preview for dagit-storybook ready! ✅ Preview Built with commit 4ccbc21. |
Addendum to e6ed078.
Remove two places where we turned
asset_check_selectionfrom[]toNone. This lets us passasset_selection=[whatever]andasset_check_selection=[]to only materialize the assets and not run checks.asset_selection=[whatever]andasset_check_selection=Nonewill do both.This is somewhere that having a combined object might let us be more explicit instead of using these two values. But I think as long as we have a test cases for entrypoints we add, we'll catch if they get messed up