DG-1746 Support custom relationshipDef for any Assets linking #3479
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
nikhilbonte21
commented
Sep 6, 2024
| if (map.containsKey(AtlasRelatedObjectId.KEY_RELATIONSHIP_ATTRIBUTES) && !map.containsKey(AtlasRelatedObjectId.KEY_RELATIONSHIP_TYPE)) { | ||
| return false; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (guid != null && StringUtils.isNotEmpty(guid.toString())) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sample
"appendRelationshipAttributes": {
"userDefRelationshipTo": [
{
"guid": "6549985b-b6cc-430f-9042-cbb515847536",
"typeName": "Table",
"relationshipType": "UserDefRelationship",
"relationshipAttributes": {
"attributes": {
"toType": "Classifiedby",
"fromType": "Isa"
}
}
}
],
}
| relationshipAttributes.put("attributes", relationship.getAttributes()); | ||
| ret.getAttributes().put("relationshipAttributes", relationshipAttributes); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sample
{
"typeName": "Table",
"attributes": {
"userDefRelationshipTo": [],
"qualifiedName": "target_table_qualified_name",
"name": "target_table",
"userDefRelationshipFrom": [
{
"guid": "8762fc1f-c10c-4caf-9539-ea529a936f4c",
"typeName": "Table",
"attributes": {
"relationshipAttributes": {
"typeName": "UserDefRelationship",
"attributes": {
"toType": "classifiedBy",
"fromType": "isA"
}
},
"name": "source_table"
},
"uniqueAttributes": {
"qualifiedName": "source_table_qualified_name"
}
}
]
},
"guid": "de28c2a9-0ce3-48b3-83d4-3998187e13a6",
"status": "ACTIVE",
"displayText": "target_table",
"classificationNames": [],
"classifications": [],
"meaningNames": [],
"meanings": [],
"isIncomplete": false,
"labels": [],
"createdBy": "service-account-atlan-argo",
"updatedBy": "service-account-atlan-argo",
"createTime": 1723215374293,
"updateTime": 1723215374293
}
repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/tasks/TaskExecutor.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Comment on lines
500
to
512
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("utmTag", "other"); | ||
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("source", "other"); | ||
| for (String utmTag : parameters.getUtmTags()) { | ||
| if (TRACKING_UTM_TAGS.contains(utmTag)) { | ||
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("utmTag", utmTag); | ||
| break; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if (parameters.getUtmTags().contains(UTM_TAG_FROM_PRODUCT)) { | ||
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("source", UTM_TAG_FROM_PRODUCT); | ||
| } | ||
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("name", RELATIONSHIP_INDEXSEARCH_TAG_NAME); | ||
| indexsearchMetric.setTotalTimeMSecs(System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can skip it for now, we have added this metric to track indexsearch only which is very important. Do you think this endpoint would be very important to track by utmTags?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not important now as we are not returning any asset with this API.
We only support aggregations which should never be stored as a search metric, we can add it later once this API supports returning assets
nikhilbonte21
changed the title
nikhilbonte21
force-pushed
the
DG-1746
branch
from
f03d4d2
to
9b702f4
Compare
nikhilbonte21
force-pushed
the
DG-1746
branch
from
9b702f4
to
1c4bdd8
Compare
sumandas0
reviewed
Sep 12, 2024
Comment on lines
500
to
512
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("utmTag", "other"); | ||
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("source", "other"); | ||
| for (String utmTag : parameters.getUtmTags()) { | ||
| if (TRACKING_UTM_TAGS.contains(utmTag)) { | ||
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("utmTag", utmTag); | ||
| break; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if (parameters.getUtmTags().contains(UTM_TAG_FROM_PRODUCT)) { | ||
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("source", UTM_TAG_FROM_PRODUCT); | ||
| } | ||
| indexsearchMetric.addTag("name", RELATIONSHIP_INDEXSEARCH_TAG_NAME); | ||
| indexsearchMetric.setTotalTimeMSecs(System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can skip it for now, we have added this metric to track indexsearch only which is very important. Do you think this endpoint would be very important to track by utmTags?
repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/graph/GraphBackedSearchIndexer.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
sumandas0
previously approved these changes
Sep 12, 2024
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.
Change description
Hagerty (Customer) wants a way to define custom objects that are built on top of Atlan’s Assets interface, create custom definitions for relationships between 2 arbitrary assets and want some properties on the relationship as well.
Overall we try to keep it very generic to make it GA.
Type of change
Related issues
DG-1746 Support custom relationshipDef for any Assets linking
Checklists
Development
Security
Code review