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
intial schema migrations setup for sqlalchemy models #8532
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
Codecov ReportPatch and project coverage have no change.
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #8532 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 87.45% 87.45%
=======================================
Files 148 148
Lines 18499 18499
Branches 3158 3158
=======================================
Hits 16179 16179
Misses 2032 2032
Partials 288 288
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
👑 |
I need to get my hands dirty with this for a few more days to make it fully ready. |
Is this really something that should be on the celery side?
|
I will share more context here. |
we got a regression report and had to revert #8475 (comment) so thought that adding migration is the safer bet. what do you think? |
I think DB changes should be clearly documented in the changelog. But executing them extremely dependent on the environment. Note: This is assuming that you do not maintain your completely separate sqlalchemy environment. If you do, then migrations in celery make sense (because it's completely independent of the application's database usage). But if you defer this to the application's sqlalchemy environment, then IMHO what I mentioned in my previous comment applies. |
is using multi db schema migrations a feasible option? |
using alembic