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

LookerStartPdtBuildOperator, LookerCheckPdtBuildSensor : fix empty materialization id handling #23025

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 26, 2022

Conversation

alekseiloginov
Copy link
Contributor

Changes

  • Add materialization id check for null in sensor
  • Check materialization id for an empty string (not just null)

^ Add meaningful description above

Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code change, Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in UPDATING.md.

@boring-cyborg boring-cyborg bot added area:providers provider:google Google (including GCP) related issues labels Apr 14, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot added the okay to merge It's ok to merge this PR as it does not require more tests label Apr 25, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link

The PR is likely OK to be merged with just subset of tests for default Python and Database versions without running the full matrix of tests, because it does not modify the core of Airflow. If the committers decide that the full tests matrix is needed, they will add the label 'full tests needed'. Then you should rebase to the latest main or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease.

@eladkal eladkal changed the title fix empty materialization id handling LookerStartPdtBuildOperator, LookerCheckPdtBuildSensor : fix empty materialization id handling Apr 26, 2022
@eladkal eladkal merged commit 37a7b27 into apache:main Apr 26, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:providers okay to merge It's ok to merge this PR as it does not require more tests provider:google Google (including GCP) related issues
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants