Skip to content

fix(providers): use warehouse-backed storage#182

Open
jonathanhaaswriter wants to merge 1 commit intosnowflake-query-surfaces-warehouse-20260327from
snowflake-provider-storage-warehouse-20260327
Open

fix(providers): use warehouse-backed storage#182
jonathanhaaswriter wants to merge 1 commit intosnowflake-query-surfaces-warehouse-20260327from
snowflake-provider-storage-warehouse-20260327

Conversation

@jonathanhaaswriter
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

  • replace provider storage wiring from direct Snowflake clients to the generic warehouse interface
  • update provider table sync helpers to use dialect-aware warehouse merge/upsert behavior
  • add regression coverage for provider syncs against a non-Snowflake warehouse backend

Validation

  • go test ./internal/providers -run "TestBaseProviderSyncTable_UsesConfiguredWarehouse|TestEnsureProviderTable_UsesIdempotentAlter|TestEnsureProviderTable_SkipsExistingColumnsCaseInsensitive"
  • go test ./internal/app ./internal/providers
  • go test -race ./...
  • GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.26.1 go run github.com/golangci/golangci-lint/v2/cmd/golangci-lint@v2.8.0 run --timeout 5m ./...

@jonathanhaaswriter
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

One thing I think we missed here: the provider cleanup delete path in internal/providers/storage.go still hard-codes ? placeholders (DELETE ... IN (?, ?, ...)) after switching to warehouse-backed storage. Inserts/upserts were moved to dialect-aware helpers, but this delete path wasn't, so Postgres deletes look like they'll fail and leave stale provider rows behind.

Can we build that SQL with the warehouse placeholder helper (or move it into a dialect-aware tableops helper) before landing?

@jonathanhaaswriter jonathanhaaswriter force-pushed the snowflake-query-surfaces-warehouse-20260327 branch from 7663564 to 0d24034 Compare March 28, 2026 02:14
@jonathanhaaswriter jonathanhaaswriter force-pushed the snowflake-provider-storage-warehouse-20260327 branch from 01ae291 to 0d496b3 Compare March 28, 2026 02:20
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.

1 participant