I have a parameterized ADF pipeline that is feeded data from a metadata table that is stored in SQL db.
One of the columns in the metadata table is 'IsActiveFlag.' Whilst developing the pipeline I used this parameter as condition to filter out records in the metadata table where IsActiveFlag = N.
As I am preparing to deploy to production I am trying to find a way I can improve my pipeline so that I won't be dependent on the IsActiveFlag filter. Ideally I would be able to update the IsActiveFlag some other dynamic way instead of having to change the values manually and then deploy to production based on user demand.
Does anyone have any tips or recommendations on how I can improve my pipeline?
Thanks in advance!
Having 'IsActiveFlag' is a good way to filter out the tablenames you don't want to ingest. If you would perform delete the table entries which you don't want to ingest in , it would be kind of hard delete which is not recommended. Better to go with IsActiveFlag .
Related
I am trying to build a cloud data warehouse where I have staged the on-prem tables as parquet files in data lake.
I implemented the metadata driven incremental load.
In the above data flow I am trying to implement merge query passing the table name as parameter so that the data flow dynamically locate respective parquet files for full data and incremental data and then go through some ETL steps to implement merge query.
The merge query is working fine. But I found that projection is not correct. As the source files are dynamic, I also want to "import projection" dynamically during the runtime. So that the same data flow can be used to implement merge query for any table.
In the picture, you see it is showing 104 columns (which is a static projection that it imported at the development time). Actually for this table it should be 38 columns.
Can I dynamically (i.e run-time) assign the projection? If so how?
Or anyone has any suggestion regarding this?
Thanking
Muntasir Joarder
Enable Schema drift in your source transformation when the metadata is often changed. This removes or adds columns in the run time.
The source projection displays what has been imported at the run time but it changes based on the source schema at run time.
Refer to this document for more details with examples.
I have flow files with data records in it. I'm able to place it on S3 bucket. From there on I want to run COPY command and update command with joins to achieve MERGE / UPSERT operation. Can anyone suggest ways to solve this as firehose only executes copy command and I can't make UPSERT / MERGE operation as prescribed by AWS docs directly, so has to copy into staging table and update or insert using some conditions.
There are a number of ways to do this but I usually go with a lambda function run every 5 minutes or so that takes the data put in Redshift from firehose and merges it with existing data. Redshift likes to run on larger "chunks" of data and it is most efficient if you build up some size before performing these operations. The best practice is to move the data from the firehose target in an atomic operation like ALTER TABLE APPEND and use this new table as the source for merging. This is so firehose can keep adding data while the merge is in process.
I want to export the data from Cloud SQL (postgres) to a CSV file periodically (once a day for example) and each time the DB rows are exported it must not be exported in the next export task.
I'm currently using a POST request to perform the export task using cloud scheduler. The problem here (or at least until I know) is that it won't be able to export and delete (or update the rows to mark them as exported) in a single http export request.
Is there any possibility to delete (or update) the rows which have been exported automatically with any Cloud SQL parameter in the http export request?
If not, I assume it should be done it a cloud function triggered by a pub/sub (using scheduler to send data once a day to pub/sub) but, is there any optimal way to take all the ID of the rows retrieved from the select statment (which will be use in the export) to delete (or update) them later?
You can export and delete (or update) at the same time using RETURNING.
\copy (DELETE FROM pgbench_accounts WHERE aid<1000 RETURNING *) to foo.txt
The problem would be in the face of crashes. How can you know that foo.txt has been writing and flushed to disk, before the DELETE is allowed to commit? Or the reverse, foo.txt is partially (or fully) written, but a crash prevents DELETE from committing.
Can't you make the system idempotent, so that exporting the same row more than once doesn't create problems?
You could use a set up to achieve what you are looking for:
1.Create a Cloud Function to extract the information from the database that subscribes to a Pub/Sub topic.
2.Create a Pub/Sub topic to trigger that function.
3.Create a Cloud Scheduler job that invokes the Pub/Sub trigger.
4.Run the Cloud Scheduler job.
5.Then create a trigger which activate another Cloud Function to delete all the data require from the database once the csv has been created.
Here I leave you some documents which could help you if you decide to follow this path.
Using Pub/Sub to trigger a Cloud Function:https://cloud.google.com/scheduler/docs/tut-pub-sub
Connecting to Cloud SQL from Cloud Functions:https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/mysql/connect-functionsCloud
Storage Tutorial:https://cloud.google.com/functions/docs/tutorials/storage
Another method aside from #jjanes would be to partition your database by date. This would allow you to create an index on the date, making exporting or deleting a days entries very easy. With this implementation, you could also create a Cron Job that deletes all tables older then X days ago.
The documentation provided will walk you through setting up a Ranged partition
The table is partitioned into “ranges” defined by a key column or set of columns, with no overlap between the ranges of values assigned to different partitions. For example, one might partition by date ranges, or by ranges of identifiers for particular business objects.
Thank you for all your answers. There are multiples ways of doing this, so I'm goint to explain how I did it.
In the database I have included a column which contains the date when the data was inserted.
I used a cloud scheduler with the following body:
{"exportContext":{"fileType": "CSV", "csvExportOptions" :{"selectQuery" : "select \"column1\", \"column2\",... , \"column n\" from public.\"tablename\" where \"Insertion_Date\" = CURRENT_DATE - 1" },"uri": "gs://bucket/filename.csv","databases": ["postgres"]}}
This scheduler will be triggered once a day and it will export only the data of the previous day
Also, I have to noticed that in the query I used in cloud scheduler you can choose which columns you want to export, doing this you can avoid to export the column which include the Insertion_Date and use this column only an auxiliary.
Finally, the cloud scheduler will create automatically the csv file in a bucket
After doing a bit of research, I see that since Redshift doesn't support merge/upsert some people are using staging tables to update/insert records. Since Redshift also doesn't support procedures (triggers, etc.) does anyone have suggestions for how they've automated this process(lambda, data pipeline, etc.)?
I don't think there is one right answer to this. Broadly there are two basic approaches to this I know of.
An explicit step in your ETL that's performed as you're loading data (using this pattern)
A batch cronjob that handles upserts periodically
Option 1 is probably the best approach, I believe. AWS Data Pipeline supports this with the RedshiftCopyActivity by using the insertMode field set to OVERWRITE_EXISTING.
At my job we've done this manually in our data pipeline by running the load command to a staging table and the upsert within the same sql transaction.
The other approach (option 2) is to have your ETL just appends new data to a staging table (you can use AWS Firehose for something like this), which you then use with a scheduled cronjob to update the target table on a scheduled basis. The upside of this is that your ETL is simpler, but the cronjob becomes another point of failure.
I am new to SSIS and am after some assistance in creating an SSIS package to do a specific task. My data is stored remotely within a MySQL Database and this is downloaded to a SQL Server 2014 Database. What I want to do is the following, create a package where I can enter 2 dates that can be compared against the create date/date modified per record on a number of tables to give me a snap shot and compare the MySQL Data to the SQL Data so that I can see if there are any rows that are missing from my local SQL Database or if any need to be updated. Some tables have no dates so I just want to see a record count on what is missing if anything between the 2. If this is better achieved through TSQL I am happy to hear about other suggestions or sites to look at where things have been done similar.
In relation to your query Tab :
"Hi Tab, What happens at the moment is our master data is stored in a MySQL Database, the data was then downloaded to a SQL Server Database as a one off. What happens at the moment is I have a SSIS package that uses the MAX ID which can be found on most of the tables to work out which records are new and just downloads them or updates them. What I want to do is run separate checks on the tables to make sure that during the download nothing has been missed and everything is within sync. In an ideal world I would like to pass in to a SSIS package or tsql stored procedure a date range, shall we say calender week, this would then check for any differences between the remote MySQL database tables and the local SQL tables. It does not currently have to do anything but identify issues, correcting them may come later or changes would need to be made to the existing sync package. Hope his makes more sense."
Thanks P
To do this, you need to implement a Type 1 Slowly Changing Dimension type data flow in SSIS. There are a number of ways to do this, including a built in transformation aptly called the Slowly Changing Dimension transformation. Whilst this is easy to set up, it is a pain to maintain and it runs horrendously slowly.
There are numerous ways to set this up using other transformations or even SQL merge statements which are detailed here: https://bennyaustin.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/alternatives-to-ssis-scd-wizard-component/
I would recommend that you use Lookup transformations as they perform better than the Slowly Changing Dimension transformation but offer better diagnostics and error handling than the better performing SQL merge statement.
Before you do this you will need to add a Checksum or Hashbytes column to your SQL data for ease of comparison with the incoming MySQL data.
In short, calculate some sort of repeatable checksum as the data is downloaded into your SQL Server, then use this in an SSIS Lookup, matching on the row key, to check for changes. Where the checksum value is different for the same row it needs updating and where there is no matching row key in your SQL Data you need to insert the new row.