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

Jinja execution is not happening when a dataset "sync columns" feature is used #25839

Open
pankajsoni22 opened this issue Nov 2, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
validation:validated A committer has validated / submitted the issue or it was reported by multiple users

Comments

@pankajsoni22
Copy link
Contributor

pankajsoni22 commented Nov 2, 2023

A clear and concise description of what the bug is.

How to reproduce the bug

  1. Go to a dataset which implements time filter 'from_dttm'/'to_dttm' jinja values to use them in the dataset.
  2. Click edit button on dataset
  3. Click on third tab "COLUMNS" (Refer the screenshot below)
  4. Click on "SYNC COLUMNS FROM SOURCE"
  5. Query throws the error about syntax error because does not execute Jinja

Expected results

It should sync the columns without any error

Actual results

Generate SQL syntax error as Jinja is not native to SQL.

Screenshots

image

Environment

Feature flags:
ENABLE_TEMPLATE_PROCESSING=True

@sfirke
Copy link
Member

sfirke commented Nov 2, 2023

Thanks for reporting. This behavior has existed for a while but I don't think is clearly documented like this. I use this workaround to sync columns: #21793 (comment) Basically, delete the Jinja, sync columns, re-paste the Jinja again. But ideally having Jinja templating would not break the sync columns function.

@sfirke sfirke added the validation:validated A committer has validated / submitted the issue or it was reported by multiple users label Nov 2, 2023
@rusackas
Copy link
Member

rusackas commented Apr 5, 2024

It's been about 5 months since this thread was last touched. Can anyone confirm if the issue still exists in 3.1.2 or 4.0? Otherwise this is at risk of being closed as stale, in assumption that the workaround is good enough for now :)

@aolwas
Copy link

aolwas commented Apr 6, 2024

The issue still exists at least in 3.1.1.
I can't tell if a fix is available in last releases just looking at the changelogs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
validation:validated A committer has validated / submitted the issue or it was reported by multiple users
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants