-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
Add alternative provider retrieval measurement #571
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
Open
pyropy
wants to merge
18
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
add/network-wide-retrieval-measurement
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+77
−8
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
18 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
7eecd81
Add support for network wide check
pyropy dd80cd0
Simplify name for network wide measurements
pyropy 11af4fc
Extend network measurement with more columns
pyropy eae83a1
Rename network retrieval table
pyropy 87d330e
Edit measurement test data
pyropy 2b52cd4
Fix failing test
pyropy 91f1a19
Convert network measurement to object inside the measurement
pyropy 4357648
Fix failing test
pyropy b2bcb2b
Rename network check to alternative provider check
pyropy 0ede95e
Fix failing tests
pyropy 60ec48b
Merge branch 'main' into add/network-wide-retrieval-measurement
pyropy 94201d1
Merge branch 'main' into add/network-wide-retrieval-measurement
pyropy bba43e4
Add alt provider id
pyropy 3ea8dae
Fix insert query
pyropy 428a4f6
Merge branch 'main' into add/network-wide-retrieval-measurement
pyropy 6f74b20
Merge branch 'main' into add/network-wide-retrieval-measurement
pyropy 85f497e
Publish new measurement fields
pyropy 43bcbc8
Merge branch 'add/network-wide-retrieval-measurement' of github.com:f…
pyropy 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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 |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ | ||
ALTER TABLE measurements | ||
ADD COLUMN alternative_provider_check_status_code INTEGER, | ||
ADD COLUMN alternative_provider_check_timeout BOOLEAN NOT NULL DEFAULT FALSE, | ||
ADD COLUMN alternative_provider_check_car_too_large BOOLEAN NOT NULL DEFAULT FALSE, | ||
ADD COLUMN alternative_provider_check_end_at TIMESTAMPTZ, | ||
ADD COLUMN alternative_provider_check_protocol protocol, | ||
ADD COLUMN alternative_provider_check_provider_id TEXT; |
This file contains hidden or 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 hidden or 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.
Throwing this out there: We could alternatively implement this in such a way that after the alternative provider check has been completed, two measurements will have been created. One would link to the other. This would save us from having to duplicate the measurement schema inside itself. I don't think this is worth it yet though
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.
No that suggestion is really not important since spark-api's business is just buffering measurements until it flushes them again. If anything, we should discuss this in a repo that's further down the data processing pipeline
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.
I was thinking about this a bit and you are right. What started of as adding one field (status code for alternative retrieval) turned up into duplicating code a lot. We might be better off with adding a relationship between columns in the measurements table between regular and alternative provider check. That way we could avoid duplicating code down the processing and evaluation pipeline.