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

fix: Changed the table name in delete item to use client tablename #8

Conversation

thusharprakash
Copy link
Contributor

@thusharprakash thusharprakash commented Dec 26, 2023

Description:

Changes Made:

The deleteItem function is currently relying on the table name fetched from the environment variable. This requires the maintenance of a separate variable named DYNAMODB_TABLE for the function to operate correctly. To align with the consistency of the codebase and ensure uniformity, I have made modifications to the function. The updated implementation now utilizes the table name configured for the DynamoDB client, bringing it in line with the approach adopted by other functions. This adjustment addresses an oversight where the deleteItem function was not following the same convention as other functions in handling the DynamoDB table name.

Key Points:

Before:

deleteItem function used the table name from the DYNAMODB_TABLE environment variable.
Required a separate variable (DYNAMODB_TABLE) for correct functionality.

After:

Modified deleteItem to use the table name configured for the DynamoDB client.
Ensures consistency with other functions in the codebase.
Reason for the Change:
To maintain code consistency and streamline the usage of DynamoDB table names across functions. This change eliminates the need for a separate environment variable (DYNAMODB_TABLE) specific to the deleteItem function, aligning it with the established configuration pattern used by other functions.

Related Issues:

#9

@shidil shidil changed the title chore: 🎨 Changed the table name in delete item to use client tablename fix: Changed the table name in delete item to use client tablename Dec 27, 2023
@shidil
Copy link
Member

shidil commented Dec 27, 2023

@thusharprakash Please configure commit signing, and rebase pull request.

Follow https://docs.github.com/en/authentication/managing-commit-signature-verification

After configuring signing rebase with git rebase --signoff origin/main then force push.

auto-merge was automatically disabled December 27, 2023 01:26

Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access

@thusharprakash thusharprakash force-pushed the Thushar/chore/deleteItem-to-use-client-table branch 2 times, most recently from 9e88145 to 3379580 Compare December 27, 2023 01:42
@thusharprakash thusharprakash force-pushed the Thushar/chore/deleteItem-to-use-client-table branch from 3379580 to cedef7f Compare January 4, 2024 06:36
@shidil
Copy link
Member

shidil commented Jan 4, 2024

@thusharprakash Cannot merge this PR until your commits are signed.

…dynamodb client

Signed-off-by: Thushar M Prakash <thushar@arezlabs.com>
Signed-off-by: Thushar M Prakash <thushar.prakash@oolio.com>
@thusharprakash thusharprakash force-pushed the Thushar/chore/deleteItem-to-use-client-table branch from cedef7f to 39845bf Compare January 4, 2024 07:04

This PR has 4 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +1 -3
Percentile : 1.6%

Total files changed: 1

Change summary by file extension:
.go : +1 -3

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@shidil shidil added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 4, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Jan 4, 2024
@shidil shidil added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 4, 2024
Merged via the queue into oolio-group:main with commit 00512d1 Jan 4, 2024
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants