Skip to content

RANGER-5217: revert mandatory distinct clause as getPolicy request may fail for oracle #582

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

pradeepagrawal8184
Copy link
Contributor

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

getPolicy request may fail as the distinct query clause is not valid for oracle. This PR reverts the changes done by RANGER-4410 commit 7528f5d

How was this patch tested?

After the build tried the get policy call which was failing earlier.

@mneethiraj
Copy link
Contributor

@pradeepagrawal8184 - wouldn't this revert cause regression in GDS search API (enhancements in RANGER-4410)?

@pradeepagrawal8184
Copy link
Contributor Author

pradeepagrawal8184 commented Jun 2, 2025

@pradeepagrawal8184 - wouldn't this revert cause regression in GDS search API (enhancements in RANGER-4410)?

  1. This PR is reverting the change done via RANGER-4410 which regressed the getPolicy download call in oracle env.
  2. From RANGER-4410 changes, i am unable to figure out why distinct was needed. i can try to re-create the referred sql statement which shall work across db flavors after understanding the idea behind the RANGER-4410 implementation.
  3. Also in SearchCriteria file there is reference to isDistinct which is false always.

@kishorgollapalliwar
Copy link
Contributor

@pradeepagrawal8184 and @mneethiraj disabling distinct is expected to break following APIs

  • /service/gds/dataset/summary?dataShareNamePartial=Test_datashare
  • /service/gds/datashare/summary?dataShareNamePartial=Test_datashare

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.

3 participants