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

[OPIK-622] Remove deprecated dataset item fields #1003

Conversation

BorisTkachenko
Copy link
Contributor

Details

Remove deprecated dataset item fields

Testing

Covered by existing integration tests

@BorisTkachenko BorisTkachenko self-assigned this Jan 8, 2025
@BorisTkachenko BorisTkachenko requested a review from a team as a code owner January 8, 2025 14:15
Borys Tkachenko and others added 2 commits January 8, 2025 16:46
Copy link
Collaborator

@andrescrz andrescrz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For the implementation part, we should keep removing a few more related things that become unused.

Please review the tests carefully. Filtering might still be legitimate on those fields, but as dynamic fields within data. Also, tests related to the migration or the deprecated fields might go away entirely. But please double check that my guidance and assumptions here are correct.

Comment on lines -4802 to -4806
columns.add(Column.builder().name("input").types(Set.of(ColumnType.OBJECT)).filterFieldPrefix("data").build());
columns.add(Column.builder().name("expected_output").types(Set.of(ColumnType.OBJECT)).filterFieldPrefix("data")
.build());
columns.add(
Column.builder().name("metadata").types(Set.of(ColumnType.OBJECT)).filterFieldPrefix("data").build());
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Probably the whole addDeprecatedFields doesn't make sense anymore, as we're removing the deprecated fields entirely.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's still needed, since we are using it mainly to get expected columns. Renamed for readability.

Borys Tkachenko and others added 2 commits January 10, 2025 13:39
Copy link
Collaborator

@andrescrz andrescrz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM from the technical perspective. Make sure you finish the investigation on the data usage that was discussed prior to deploy. Hold the merge if needed.

@BorisTkachenko BorisTkachenko merged commit 7326037 into main Jan 10, 2025
8 of 9 checks passed
@BorisTkachenko BorisTkachenko deleted the boryst/OPIK-622-dataset-items-include-a-column-named-input-with-non-dictionary-type-values branch January 10, 2025 14:45
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