SEZ9 commented on issue #11878:
URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/issues/11878#issuecomment-5358314897
@luozihen Thanks — glad we agree on keeping `primary_keys` unchanged and
introducing a separate option. Happy for you to take this on.
Your proposed `multi-table_config` shape with a nested `primary_keys`
mapping looks reasonable, and the precedence you described (per-table mapping
first, otherwise fall back to the existing `primary_keys` behavior) matches
what I had in mind. Before opening a PR, could you post 2–3 concrete config
examples covering: mapping only, mapping together with the existing
`primary_keys` option, and a table not covered by the mapping?
On mixing placeholders with concrete field names: since we're keeping the
existing `primary_keys` semantics intact, my suggestion is to handle it inside
the new option — allow `${primary_key}` as a value within the per-table
mapping, so it expands to that table's upstream key and can be combined with
static fields such as `tenant_id`. Please also define what should happen when a
matched table has no upstream primary key.
Finally, please plan for docs in both English and Chinese as part of the PR.
<!-- streview-comment:399 -->
--
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]
