Skip to content
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

fix multi asset check selection #16877

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 3, 2023

Conversation

johannkm
Copy link
Contributor

@johannkm johannkm commented Sep 28, 2023

I didn't test selecting inside a multi asset over the graphql layer, and lo and behold it wasn't being passed properly. Yet more fodder for a combo selection object.

@johannkm
Copy link
Contributor Author

Current dependencies on/for this PR:

This comment was auto-generated by Graphite.

@johannkm johannkm force-pushed the johann/09-27-fix_multi_asset_check_selection branch from ac6653d to eda1731 Compare September 29, 2023 16:31
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 29, 2023

Deploy preview for dagit-core-storybook ready!

✅ Preview
https://dagit-core-storybook-f0naicddg-elementl.vercel.app
https://johann-09-27-fix-multi-asset-check-selection.core-storybook.dagster-docs.io

Built with commit b5d2493.
This pull request is being automatically deployed with vercel-action

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 29, 2023

Deploy preview for dagit-storybook ready!

✅ Preview
https://dagit-storybook-freyzp7qo-elementl.vercel.app
https://johann-09-27-fix-multi-asset-check-selection.components-storybook.dagster-docs.io

Built with commit b5d2493.
This pull request is being automatically deployed with vercel-action

@johannkm johannkm force-pushed the johann/09-27-fix_multi_asset_check_selection branch from eda1731 to a1884d2 Compare September 29, 2023 16:45
@@ -669,6 +680,7 @@ def _get_execution_plan_from_run(
and execution_plan_snapshot.can_reconstruct_plan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

side note, not sure when this would be false. If the job was updated between us launching and executing the run?

@johannkm johannkm marked this pull request as ready for review September 29, 2023 19:54
@@ -258,23 +283,6 @@ def __init__(
backfill_policy, "backfill_policy", BackfillPolicy
)

if selected_asset_check_keys is None:
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

changed the structure here to match what we do in asset layer

@@ -794,28 +794,6 @@ def _get_job_def_for_asset_selection(
" or job."
)

# Test that selected asset checks can be run individually. Currently this is only supported
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

without this, we fall back a slightly less interpretable error. But we'll be replacing that with a better error once I land atomic execution unit ids on checks

Copy link
Contributor

@rexledesma rexledesma left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great. I stacked #16801 on top of this, and subsetting is working smoothly when executing checks in the UI 🙏

python_modules/dagster/dagster/_core/execution/api.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@johannkm johannkm force-pushed the johann/09-27-fix_multi_asset_check_selection branch from 19f5311 to b5d2493 Compare October 3, 2023 15:22
@johannkm johannkm merged commit 2f8e04a into master Oct 3, 2023
3 checks passed
@johannkm johannkm deleted the johann/09-27-fix_multi_asset_check_selection branch October 3, 2023 16:10
yuhan pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2023
I didn't test selecting inside a multi asset over the graphql layer, and
lo and behold it wasn't being passed properly. Yet more fodder for a
combo selection object.

---------

Co-authored-by: Rex Ledesma <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants