allow asset group selectors with the same name to exist under different asset groups #210
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
irshadaj
commented
Nov 14, 2023
irshadaj
force-pushed
the
selectors_uniqueness_fix
branch
from
5fac966 to
968ac5b
Compare
zinic
previously requested changes
Nov 14, 2023
Contributor
zinic
left a comment
zinic
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Left a comment on the DROP CONSTRAINT SQL statement. Changes otherwise look good.
elikmiller
reviewed
Nov 14, 2023
superlinkx
reviewed
Nov 14, 2023
irshadaj
force-pushed
the
selectors_uniqueness_fix
branch
from
d95b1b5 to
5f2e7ce
Compare
superlinkx
dismissed
zinic’s stale review
Changes were made accordingly, unblocking PR
superlinkx
approved these changes
Nov 15, 2023
Contributor
|
Looks good, feel free to pull |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Currently, the name field of an asset group selector needs to be unique regardless of the asset group. This prevents custom “High Value” nodes from being added to the “Owned” group and vice versa in BHCE, and would cause further problems if we want to add additional groups in the future. Trying to add a duplicate selector causes an error.
This story drops that constraint and creates a new uniqueness constraint on both the name and asset_group_id columns, thereby allowing a selector to exist under both Owned as well as HVT asset groups.
How Has This Been Tested?
I spun up a database on the main branch to simulate an existing DB. The selectors table has a constraint on the name column here:
Then I restarted the environment to have the migration applied:
Verified that the constraint has been updated (the new constraint name contains both column names in it):
Then I created 2 selectors with the same name but belonging to the 2 different asset groups via postman:
And verified through the database that both the selectors were created:
Next, I wiped out my database and re-created it to verify that any fresh installs will have the right constraint set up, and then repeated the selecor creation via postman to verify that multiple selectors can exist with the same name:
Types of changes
Checklist: