Skip to content

Conversation

knudtty
Copy link
Contributor

@knudtty knudtty commented Sep 22, 2025

Closes HDX-2469

Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Sep 22, 2025

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 322865e

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

Copy link

vercel bot commented Sep 22, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
hyperdx-v2-oss-app Error Error Sep 24, 2025 3:35pm

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Sep 22, 2025

E2E Test Results

All tests passed • 21 passed • 3 skipped • 150s

Status Count
✅ Passed 21
❌ Failed 0
⚠️ Flaky 0
⏭️ Skipped 3

View full report →

@knudtty knudtty requested a review from pulpdrew September 22, 2025 21:43
Comment on lines 119 to 126
const { result } = renderHook(
() =>
useGetKeyValues({
chartConfigs: mockChartConfigs,
keys: mockKeys,
}),
{ wrapper },
);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could this be updated to be a test for useMultipleGetKeyValues instead of removing it? Or is there another reason to remove it?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good call! I initially took this PR in a different direction which is why I deleted it. Going to add it back in with that new hook

Comment on lines 108 to 109
tableConnection?: TableConnection;
tableConnections?: TableConnection[];
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall I think the refactor is great, but this type update seems like a step backwards since the requirement that we provide either a list or a single object is no longer baked into the type. Consumers could provide both and typescript wouldn't complain. Thoughts on updating this type to require that only one is provided, or reverting it back to accepting a list or a single object and using the isArray check you use elsewhere to turn the object into a list if necessary?

Same question for SearchInputV2

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good idea! I like the explicitness you're outlining that typescript should complain if both are provided. I updated with a new union type that will cause a typescript error if both are provided

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.

2 participants