fix(redshift): UserTablePriviliges to track changes using table IDs' #26558
Conversation
Rizxcviii
changed the title
github-actions
bot
added
the
valued-contributor
|
@kaizencc if you could review this please, I took consideration with your previous changes requested on the old PR |
Rizxcviii
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.
A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.
|
Exemption Request: According to @kaizencc this is a fix, rather than a refactor. However, what should be noted is that the integration test is running, just a change to an integ file is not necessary. The reason being that the change is an internal change with an internal interface, not accessible for public use. |
aws-cdk-automation
added
pr-linter/exemption-requested
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hi @Rizxcviii! A few comments to get me to better understand the purpose of this PR. thanks for sticking with it!
packages/@aws-cdk/aws-redshift-alpha/test/database-query-provider/privileges.test.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
packages/@aws-cdk/aws-redshift-alpha/test/integ.database.js.snapshot/tree.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
packages/@aws-cdk/aws-redshift-alpha/test/database-query-provider/privileges.test.ts
Show resolved
Hide resolved
aws-cdk-automation
removed
the
pr/needs-community-review
|
@kaizencc could you review this please? |
|
This PR has been in the CHANGES REQUESTED state for 3 weeks, and looks abandoned. To keep this PR from being closed, please continue work on it. If not, it will automatically be closed in a week. |
|
Bump @kaizencc can you review this please. |
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
|
This PR has been deemed to be abandoned, and will be automatically closed. Please create a new PR for these changes if you think this decision has been made in error. |
aws-cdk-automation
added
the
closed-for-staleness
|
The pull request linter fails with the following errors: PRs must pass status checks before we can provide a meaningful review. If you would like to request an exemption from the status checks or clarification on feedback, please leave a comment on this PR containing |
|
|
…26955) To support solving #24246, there needs to first be a refactor of the UserTablePriviliges to instead record the table id. The reason being that new privileges would be granted/revoked on old tables that now have new names, since a change in table name caused an UPDATE action to be triggered. However the issue remains where, since the table has a new name, the grant/revoke action will be called on an invalid table name (i.e. the old table name). We now use the table id to track tables, therefore preventing UPDATE events to be triggered. This blocks #24308 This was originally PR #24874, however that had closed. @kaizencc requested changes, that I had added in here. This was originally PR #26558, however that had closed. @kaizencc requested changes, that I have already implemented previously. However, he did not review them. BREAKING CHANGE: the behavior of redshift tables has changed. UPDATE action will not be triggered on new table names and instead be triggered on table id changes. ---- *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
To support solving #24246, there needs to first be a refactor of the UserTablePriviliges to instead record the table id. The reason being that new privileges would be granted/revoked on old tables that now have new names, since a change in table name caused an UPDATE action to be triggered. However the issue remains where, since the table has a new name, the grant/revoke action will be called on an invalid table name (i.e. the old table name).
We now use the table id to track tables, therefore preventing UPDATE events to be triggered.
This blocks #24308
This was originally PR #24874, however that had closed. @kaizencc requested changes, that I had added in here.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license