-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.2k
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
[ADF v2]Add integration runtime sharing feature. #3345
Conversation
Automation for azure-sdk-for-pythonThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
@annatisch This PR is the replacement with #3124, please review. The service has NOT been deployed to all the Prod regions, I will let you know when we are ready, so that you can help merge this pull request. @hvermis please help review. Thanks! |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-nodeThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-rubyNothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-ruby |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-javaThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-goThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
] | ||
}, | ||
"LinkedIntegrationRuntimeKey": { | ||
"x-ms-discriminator-value": "Key", |
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.
Key [](start = 35, length = 3)
I think this name is not descriptive enough. It would help to see the generated .Net classes. Please generate the .Net SDK and and a CR.
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.
Sure, I will do that
In your other PR you also had listShared IRs and factories API-s, will you add them later? |
@hvermis Yes I will add them later but not now, since the two API-s will be depending on the support from ARM implementation. Sent you SDK CR with this swagger. |
For additionalProperties, I will prefer to do that in a separate pull request if the CI pass with this pull request. |
"description": "Data factory name for linked integration runtime request.", | ||
"type": "object", | ||
"properties": { | ||
"factoryName": { |
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.
@zhangyd2015
Would it be possible to add the extension "x-ms-client-name"
here? Currently this name is the same as that used for the URL parameter factoryName. Readability could be improved by giving this property a different generated client name.
For an example of the current generated Python client:
https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-python/pull/2865/files#diff-fd2acb15b40ac1ce8749314b7e6619c0R1041
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.
I think renaming will be better than using x-ms-client-name. Maybe linkedFactoryName?
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.
Service code is pending deployment now and if we change the name we will need service code change and I don't want to block the deployment as we have been waiting for long time. On the other hand, the closure class name LinkedIntegrationRuntimeRequest
has indicate its context.
I will prefer to add the extension x-ms-client-name
here.
"description": "The self-hosted integration runtime properties.", | ||
"type": "object", | ||
"properties": { | ||
"linkedInfo": { |
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.
How about renaming linkedInfo to linkedIntegrationRuntimeAuthorization and the properties class to LinkedIntegrationRuntimeAuthorizationType, and the inherited classes to LinkedIntegrationRuntimeKeyAuthorization and LinkedIntegrationRuntimeRbacAuthorization
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.
It is actually info here, not just authorization. we may add more properties here which are nothing related with authorization.
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.
Agreed to change properties class to LinkedIntegrationRuntimeType, inherited classes to LinkedIntegrationRuntimeKeyAuthorization and LinkedIntegrationRuntimeRbacAuthorization
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.
One more question here - Self Hosted IR can only have one linked IR? Shouldn't this be an array?
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.
linked IR doesn't exist in self-hosted IR as property, it has its own entity with selfhosted IR info
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.
Please consider renaming some of properties and classes for better readability
@annatisch Could you please merge this pull request if there is no other issue? |
This checklist is used to make sure that common issues in a pull request are addressed. This will expedite
the process of getting your pull request merged and avoid extra work on your part to fix issues discovered during the review process.
PR information
api-version
in the path should match theapi-version
in the spec).Quality of Swagger