Closed cnolanminich closed 5 months ago
Your pull request is automatically being deployed to Dagster Cloud.
Location | Status | Link | Updated |
---|---|---|---|
demo_assets | ![]() |
View in Cloud | Mar 11, 2024 at 06:22 PM (UTC) |
snowflake_insights | ![]() |
View in Cloud | Mar 11, 2024 at 06:22 PM (UTC) |
basics | ![]() |
View in Cloud | Mar 11, 2024 at 06:22 PM (UTC) |
data-eng-pipeline | ![]() |
View in Cloud | Mar 11, 2024 at 06:22 PM (UTC) |
batch_enrichment | ![]() |
View in Cloud | Mar 11, 2024 at 06:22 PM (UTC) |
Yea I like the idea of using markdown output metadata in an asset check, but I think this particular data frame is fairly confusing because what you are presenting isn't really a dataframe, the rows aren't meaningful across columns.
I think of this data check more as looking for bad company data, not necessarily checking that every expected company was observed. So maybe we could simplify it as:
MetadataValue.md(f"Observed the following unexpected companies: {list(unique_companies - expected_companies)}")
Oh yeah I agree! I'll push that change and then this one will be in good shape
Fixed!
This PR updates the asset check on the
RAW_DATA.users
asset in a few waysWill pull this out of draft mode once we get some consensus on the metadata output for this