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

upgrade to hasura2.0 #328

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 27, 2021
Merged

upgrade to hasura2.0 #328

merged 3 commits into from
Dec 27, 2021

Conversation

jakekaplan
Copy link
Contributor

@jakekaplan jakekaplan commented Dec 14, 2021

Summary

Upgrades Hasura to v.2.0.9

Importance

Prefect Server is on a very old version of Hasura. Upgrading to v.2.0.9 allows it to keep up with current functionality.

Checklist

This PR:

- [ ] adds new tests (if appropriate)

  • adds a change file in the changes/ directory (if appropriate)

@jakekaplan jakekaplan marked this pull request as ready for review December 15, 2021 14:30
@cicdw
Copy link
Member

cicdw commented Dec 15, 2021

This LGTM -- we just need to confirm that the metadata that Hasura manages within the DB isn't negatively affected by this change; we'll need to reference the section titled "Deprecation of database specific env vars" in the upgrade guide.

I think one way of approaching this is to start Server connected to a persistent database with the older version of Hasura, and then do the Hasura upgrade only (with the same DB) and confirm all works as expected

@jakekaplan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cicdw I tested this with a persistent postgres on my local machine. Hasura will manage the hdb_catalog schema itself. It effectively removes the tables used for v1 Hasura and populates v2 Hasura tables. Really what it does it shoves all that table information into a single json blob in a hdb_metadata table. Which exactly you get out when you export the metadata table via the UI

@jakekaplan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cicdw I updated the yaml to "hasura config verion 3" to keep it consistent with cloud. We don't actually set anything different here (like max_connections) in cloud, but this allows for it if we want to.

@BitTheByte
Copy link
Contributor

@cicdw this change seems ok, I tested the server's functionality using my local environment and everything apparently is working fine. I'd love to see it moves to release as I'm also using Hasura for my deployment and it would be easier to just have one instance instead of two

@cicdw
Copy link
Member

cicdw commented Dec 27, 2021

Thanks for testing @BitTheByte , we really appreciate that!

Copy link
Member

@cicdw cicdw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

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