Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ab#79314 add filters tooltips #837

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: beta
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

MwanPygmay
Copy link
Contributor

@MwanPygmay MwanPygmay commented Nov 21, 2023

Description

Wrote query to get fields details. Query should be optimised: the max records that we query is 5. Sort and limit should behave well and avoid sorting the whole records (see documentation below). Would be good to test on a database with lots of records. On small database it is instant.

Useful links

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • Improvement (refactor or addition to existing functionality)

How Has This Been Tested?

See front, acquirement of data went well. Main problem is often not providing a resource id.

Screenshots

See front.

Checklist:

( * == Mandatory )

  • * I have set myself as assignee of the pull request
  • * My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • * Linting does not generate new warnings
  • * I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • * I have put the ticket for review, adding the oort-backend team to the list of reviewers
  • * I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • * I have put JSDoc comment in all required places
  • * My changes generate no new warnings
  • * I have included screenshots describing my changes if relevant
  • * I have selected labels in the Pull Request, according to the changes with code brings
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation ( if required )
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

@MwanPygmay MwanPygmay self-assigned this Nov 21, 2023
@MwanPygmay MwanPygmay added the enhancement Existing feature label Nov 21, 2023
@MwanPygmay MwanPygmay requested a review from a team November 21, 2023 15:40
@MwanPygmay MwanPygmay marked this pull request as ready for review November 21, 2023 15:40
@estelafs estelafs requested review from estelafs and removed request for a team November 21, 2023 18:42
Copy link
Contributor

@estelafs estelafs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@MwanPygmay While checking the date type issue on the front end, you could also combine here in the backend the cases of 'numeric', 'date' and 'time' fields since they have the same code and we can just send the data string to the frontend once since datepipe already converts it to date when necessary

@estelafs estelafs self-requested a review November 22, 2023 12:05
Copy link
Contributor

@estelafs estelafs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Working as expected.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement Existing feature
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants