[CT-3102] [Bug] semantic models don't support partial parsing

[dave-connors-3]

Is this a new bug in dbt-core?

• I believe this is a new bug in dbt-core
• I have searched the existing issues, and I could not find an existing issue for this bug

Current Behavior

Semantic models don't appear to support partial parsing -- in working through #8589, once semantic models were added to the dbt ls command output, tests were failing related to partial parsing. It turns out that the SemanticModel class does not contain any comparison methods to detect changes (namely same_contents) that allow for partial parsing

Expected Behavior

SMs are parsed with consistent behavior to other node types

Steps To Reproduce

1. create SM
2. update it
3. run dbt compile
4. notice no changes

Relevant log output

No response

Environment

- OS: TJ mac
- Python: 3.10
- dbt: 1.7.0b2

Which database adapter are you using with dbt?

postgres

Additional Context

No response

[dbeatty10]

Thanks for reporting this @dave-connors-3 !

@Jstein77 or @QMalcolm -- is there any reason why we wouldn't want to match the expected behavior that @dave-connors-3 described?

[jtcohen6]

(namely same_contents) that allow for partial parsing

I was under the impression that this method is used for state:modified comparisons (Slim CI), but not for partial parsing. There may be something else afoot!

@dave-connors-3 Any chance you could include your full reproduction case? (yaml you started with, commands you ran, yaml you changed it to)

[dbeatty10]

@dave-connors-3 looking forward to seeing you at the San Diego edition of Coalesce!

Would you be willing to walk me though a more detailed reproduction case? We discovered a couple other issues related to partial parsing (#8859 and #8860), and it would good to tackle the issue you are reporting at the same time.

What we're going for a is a step-by-step set of instructions and engineer could use to both trigger the problem and then confirm it's fixed afterwards (like this).

I'm willing to write it up if you can walk me through it in-person.

[dbeatty10]

@dave-connors-3 thanks for jamming on this with me in San Diego! 🏖️

Based on what we looked at together, we agreed that the (lack of changes) you saw within manifest.json is likely covered by #8859, so I'm going to close this in favor of that issue.

Thanks again -- you rock 🎸