You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We're using dbt-spark to run tests on Databricks, and one of our tables has over 150 columns with tests associated. Each time we test at least a few will fail, randomly, due to a connection issue which looks to be transient.
The connector will only retry a connection if it considers the error 'retryable', usually that the cluster is pending start-up, so I would like to add a configuration entry to be able to override this behaviour and retry every connection issue. This would be a boolean we can add to the definition in profiles.yml called 'retry_all'
Who will this benefit?
Anyone that is hitting this random failure issue. DBT is unusable if we can't rely on the testing.
Are you interested in contributing this feature?
I have a fix that I'm using already, so I can open a PR to add this in. I would like to see if everyone thinks this is a good way to resolve this issue, and can adjust accordingly.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Describe the feature
We're using dbt-spark to run tests on Databricks, and one of our tables has over 150 columns with tests associated. Each time we test at least a few will fail, randomly, due to a connection issue which looks to be transient.
The connector will only retry a connection if it considers the error 'retryable', usually that the cluster is pending start-up, so I would like to add a configuration entry to be able to override this behaviour and retry every connection issue. This would be a boolean we can add to the definition in profiles.yml called 'retry_all'
Who will this benefit?
Anyone that is hitting this random failure issue. DBT is unusable if we can't rely on the testing.
Are you interested in contributing this feature?
I have a fix that I'm using already, so I can open a PR to add this in. I would like to see if everyone thinks this is a good way to resolve this issue, and can adjust accordingly.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: