feat: add section models to corpus db #252
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
jpetto
force-pushed
the
MC-1614-add-sections-tables-to-corpus
branch
3 times, most recently
from
6ffc7e5 to
9fa2aee
Compare
jpetto
commented
Jan 6, 2025
| // we will not delete Sections, instead deactivate them | ||
| active Boolean @default(false) | ||
| // track who deactivated the Section | ||
| deactivateSource ActivitySource // (ML or MANUAL) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
will add the following:
updatedBy (or updatedSource?)
deactivatedAt
jpetto
commented
Jan 6, 2025
| active Boolean @default(true) | ||
| // track who deactivated the SectionItem | ||
| deactivateSource ActivitySource // (ML or MANUAL) | ||
| createdAt DateTime @default(now()) |
- rename `ScheduledItemSource` enum to more broad `ActivitySource`
jpetto
force-pushed
the
MC-1614-add-sections-tables-to-corpus
branch
from
9fa2aee to
09380a4
Compare
| `sort` INTEGER NOT NULL, | ||
| `active` BOOLEAN NOT NULL DEFAULT false, | ||
| `createSource` ENUM('MANUAL', 'ML') NOT NULL, | ||
| `deactivateSource` ENUM('MANUAL', 'ML') NOT NULL, |
katerinachinnappan
previously approved these changes
Jan 6, 2025
rolf-moz
reviewed
Jan 6, 2025
| } | ||
|
|
||
| model SectionItem { | ||
| id Int @id @default(autoincrement()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wondering if plain id is required here and whether a single externalId would suffice as the id. Or is this the design pattern with primsa?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it's true that we don't need the integer id at the moment. this is more keeping in convention with the rest of the db design - using auto-incrementing ids for internal ids/associations. it's a small data point and shouldn't impact performance.
rolf-moz
previously approved these changes
Jan 6, 2025
jpetto
dismissed stale reviews from rolf-moz and katerinachinnappan
via
e201def
katerinachinnappan
approved these changes
Jan 7, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Goal
add section models to corpus db to enable ML to create sections for new tab.
ScheduledItemSourceenum to more broadActivitySourceI'd love feedback/perspectives on:
activeanddeactivateSourcefields - do those make sense?Implementation Decisions
Deployment steps
References
JIRA ticket: