LostSnowfluff commented on PR #72486: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/72486#issuecomment-5534021197
> The direction of this fix looks good, but other areas might need to be adjusted accordingly. > > `update_mask` is shared across all entities, but an individual entity might not provide every field specified in the mask. > > For example, if extra is included in the mask but omitted from one entity, this change passes the mask down to `update_orm_from_pydantic`, which ends up clearing that entity's existing extra via `set_extra(None)`. > > Could you test whether this bug holds true? If it does, I'd suggest fixing it and adding a regression test to prevent this from happening again. Thanks for the thoughtful review. This is a very good catch. I'll investigate how the shared `update_mask` interacts with fields omitted from individual entities, and verify whether it can clear existing values when passed to `update_orm_from_pydantic`. If the issue does exist, I'll update the fix and add a regression test. Otherwise, I'll explain why this behavior does not take place. This may take some time, but I'll report back once I've completed the investigation. Thanks again for your careful feedback. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
