-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 53
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
fix: Resolve aggregates' mapping with deep nested subtypes #1175
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #1175 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 68.59% 68.42% -0.17%
===========================================
Files 180 181 +1
Lines 17012 17041 +29
===========================================
- Hits 11669 11660 -9
- Misses 4387 4415 +28
- Partials 956 966 +10
|
Benchmark ResultsSummary
✅ See Better Results...
❌ See Worse Results...
✨ See Unchanged Results...
🐋 See Full Results... |
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.
Cheers Islam - changes look good. Have two quick todo for you RE test location and framework but otherwise all good.
Not sure how I feel about getDocs
😁 but we should perhaps let it sit for a while in develop before we as a team commit to/against it.
Congrats on your first Source PR :)
tests/integration/query/one_to_many_to_one/with_sum_order_limit_test.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
tests/integration/query/one_to_many_to_one/with_sum_order_limit_test.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
Congrats on your first PR with us Islam :)
I only have a minor nitpick that you can choose to apply or not. I'll leave it to Andy to approve once his feedback has been applied.
ee2066d
to
39c93b4
Compare
39c93b4
to
36d6867
Compare
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.
LGTM - cheers for the fix, the discussions, and congrats on getting this in :)
* Fix recursive call to CloneWithoutRender * Fix deep orderby * Map properly aggregates with deep filter * Flatten test actions Update new test framework so that it allows to adding slices to the slice of actions * Switch to new testing framework Make all test in tests/integration/query/one_to_many_to_one use new testing framework
…work#1175) * Fix recursive call to CloneWithoutRender * Fix deep orderby * Map properly aggregates with deep filter * Flatten test actions Update new test framework so that it allows to adding slices to the slice of actions * Switch to new testing framework Make all test in tests/integration/query/one_to_many_to_one use new testing framework
Relevant issue(s)
Resolves #833 #920
Description
When resolving mapping for an aggregate it will check now if nested orderby or filter subtypes (if any) are dealing with an object (that is in a relation with the current one that the aggregate query is being running on) as opposed to just a single field on the current object.