Closed loffleraSMH closed 6 months ago
I couldn't actually test this properly because I do not have access to any HPC datacuts that have this "subset" naming convention for some tables. However, from a basic review standpoint this PR is simple enough and looks good, so I'm still comfortable to merge.
Let me know if you'd like me to test more thoroughly.
I couldn't actually test this properly because I do not have access to any HPC datacuts that have this "subset" naming convention for some tables. However, from a basic review standpoint this PR is simple enough and looks good, so I'm still comfortable to merge.
Let me know if you'd like me to test more thoroughly.
Thanks @vaakesan-SMH for reviewing! Yes, I know it's a bit tricky to test this, but I think it's fine in this case. I will run a final test once the new version has been moved over to HPC - just to be sure. In the future, maybe we can think of a better way to integrate testing on HPC into our workflow to make sure everything works well before versioning up. For now, I'll go ahead and merge this.
Closes #86 (see issue description for bug and explanation for solution implemented in this PR)