Codecov Report

Merging #1427 (eb77575) into 2.x (11d0d6d) will decrease coverage by 2.17%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

📣 This organization is not using Codecov’s GitHub App Integration. We recommend you install it so Codecov can continue to function properly for your repositories. Learn more

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##                2.x    #1427      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     98.38%   96.22%   -2.17%     
+ Complexity     3699     1417    -2282     
============================================
  Files           343      152     -191     
  Lines          9123     3864    -5259     
  Branches        586      277     -309     
============================================
- Hits           8976     3718    -5258     
+ Misses          142      141       -1     
  Partials          5        5              

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

... and 191 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

Any special reason this has to merge to 2.x first?

Any special reason this has to merge to 2.x first?

I need this for pen testing on 2.7 version. I will resolve conflicts with main branch and will soon raise a PR. Following main -> 2.x -> 1.x is becoming little difficult as we mostly test and verify against the next minor version in current running major.

I have some high level questions because this PR seems have more influence than it looks:

1. There is no issue related to this main feature. I think we should create something and put it to our 2.7 or roadmap

I will add all the required issues.

2. The new .ql-data-sources index is shifting stateless SQL plugin to stateful? If the index is red for some reason, want to confirm if SQL plugin still work as before? At lease for query on default OpenSearch data source.

It should work for queries on default Opensearch Connector even in case of red .ql-datasources index. I will go through the code again and list if there are any scenarios where it breaks.

3. Data source related code and dependencies keep growing, should we move all of them to a new datasource module. Because as I understand, core only depends on resolved DataSource or Table actually.

I was thinking on similar lines whether this code is really required in core or some other place. will discuss with you and try to move this.

Any special reason this has to merge to 2.x first?

I need this for pen testing on 2.7 version. I will resolve conflicts with main branch and will soon raise a PR. Following main -> 2.x -> 1.x is becoming little difficult as we mostly test and verify against the next minor version in current running major.

Please always merge to main first. If there is any blocker, we can discuss. For pen testing, you can use feature branch also.