Skip to content
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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 10, 2018
Merged

[ADF v2]Add integration runtime sharing feature. #3345

merged 3 commits into from
Jul 10, 2018

Conversation

zhangyd2015
Copy link
Contributor

@zhangyd2015 zhangyd2015 commented Jul 3, 2018

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

  • The title of the PR is clear and informative.
  • There are a small number of commits, each of which have an informative message. This means that previously merged commits do not appear in the history of the PR. For information on cleaning up the commits in your pull request, see this page.
  • Except for special cases involving multiple contributors, the PR is started from a fork of the main repository, not a branch.
  • If applicable, the PR references the bug/issue that it fixes.
  • Swagger files are correctly named (e.g. the api-version in the path should match the api-version in the spec).

Quality of Swagger

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jul 3, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#2293

@zhangyd2015
Copy link
Contributor Author

@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!

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jul 3, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-node#2770

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jul 3, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-ruby

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-ruby

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jul 3, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-java

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-java#2136

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jul 3, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#2008

]
},
"LinkedIntegrationRuntimeKey": {
"x-ms-discriminator-value": "Key",
Copy link
Contributor

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.

Copy link
Contributor Author

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

@hvermis
Copy link
Contributor

hvermis commented Jul 4, 2018

In your other PR you also had listShared IRs and factories API-s, will you add them later?

@hvermis
Copy link
Contributor

hvermis commented Jul 4, 2018

  },

As discussed in the mail thread, you can delete this.


Refers to: specification/datafactory/resource-manager/Microsoft.DataFactory/stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json:25 in 8252d05. [](commit_id = 8252d05, deletion_comment = False)

@zhangyd2015
Copy link
Contributor Author

zhangyd2015 commented Jul 5, 2018

@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.

@zhangyd2015
Copy link
Contributor Author

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": {
Copy link
Member

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

Copy link
Contributor

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?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@zhangyd2015 zhangyd2015 Jul 6, 2018

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": {
Copy link
Contributor

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

Copy link
Contributor Author

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.

Copy link
Contributor Author

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

Copy link
Contributor

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?

Copy link
Contributor Author

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

Copy link
Contributor

@hvermis hvermis left a 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

@zhangyd2015
Copy link
Contributor Author

@annatisch Could you please merge this pull request if there is no other issue?

@annatisch annatisch merged commit f8d1e52 into Azure:master Jul 10, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants