[cost center] put all costcenter access behind API #12776
Conversation
svenefftinge
force-pushed
the
sefftinge/ubp-model-free-plan-and-12741
branch
2 times, most recently
from
757c40c to
81c2b3f
Compare
|
started the job as gitpod-build-sefftinge-ubp-model-free-plan-and-12741.3 because the annotations in the pull request description changed |
|
started the job as gitpod-build-sefftinge-ubp-model-free-plan-and-12741.4 because the annotations in the pull request description changed |
svenefftinge
force-pushed
the
sefftinge/ubp-model-free-plan-and-12741
branch
from
81c2b3f to
084ddba
Compare
components/gitpod-db/src/typeorm/migration/1662639748206-CostCenterPaymentStrategy.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
/hold |
|
Added the hold for question about the data type. |
|
/unhold |
|
|
||
| // deleted is restricted for use by db-sync | ||
| _ bool `gorm:"column:deleted;type:tinyint;default:0;" json:"deleted"` | ||
| LastModified time.Time `gorm:"->:column:_lastModified;type:timestamp;default:CURRENT_TIMESTAMP(6);" json:"_lastModified"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
out of curiosity: are the gorm definitions manually crafted, or is there a tool to sync them?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's a tool which can generate them from the DB schema. I used those initially to set up the definitions but often requires some manual tweaking.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Something I actually forgot to mention in yesterday's retro is that I'm getting a little tired of maintaining/writing all the different technical representations (DB & protobuf for TS&Go) of the same shapes. Feels like a lot of code (e.g. this PR) is really just about shoveling data through the stack by copying it into different formats. 😓
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's fair. Codegen can help but it's also important to keep the API shape independent of the shape of the DB. It tends to start very similar, but over time changes. The DB is expected to evolve while the API is expected to retain compatibility.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, I think it would already help if we didn't need to duplicate API to route dashboard requests through server. Also, I think the manual sugar.ts code could maybe be generated.
| public async up(queryRunner: QueryRunner): Promise<void> { | ||
| if (!(await columnExists(queryRunner, D_B_COST_CENTER, COL_CREATION_TIME))) { | ||
| await queryRunner.query( | ||
| `ALTER TABLE ${D_B_COST_CENTER} ADD COLUMN ${COL_CREATION_TIME} varchar(30) NOT NULL, ALGORITHM=INPLACE, LOCK=NONE `, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
they will be filled up with the implicit default value for the varchar type right? which is '', an empty string.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, true. That was not my intend, but I think it will not break.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm actually not sure what MYSQL will do with existing records here 😬 The migration worked well against an empty table.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
they will be filled up with the implicit default value for the varchar type right? which is '', an empty string.
Just verified that this is the case indeed
roboquat
added
deployed: webapp
Description
This change has unfortunately gotten a little big (still practicing keeping things small 😇).
It does the following:
usagecomponentserverwith this APIcreationTimeandbillingStrategyto cost centerRelated Issue(s)
Fixes #
How to test
You can verify that everything still works by joining the Gitpod team and changing the spending limit
Release Notes
Documentation
Werft options: