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

Default to ignoring Temp Tables for Compression check #275

Open
lowlydba opened this issue Jan 14, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

Default to ignoring Temp Tables for Compression check #275

lowlydba opened this issue Jan 14, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@lowlydba
Copy link
Contributor

I believe in most cases it isn't beneficial to mandate compression for temporary tables.

public override void Visit(CreateTableStatement node)
{
var childCompressionVisitor = new ChildCompressionVisitor();
node.AcceptChildren(childCompressionVisitor);
if (!childCompressionVisitor.CompressionOptionExists)
{
errorCallback(RULE_NAME, RULE_TEXT, node.StartLine, GetColumnNumber(node));
}
}

Requesting that this not apply at all to temp tables, or be configurable with a default of not applying to temp tables.

@nathan-boyd
Copy link
Member

This will be tricky to handle. Changing the rule would be a breaking change for existing users, creating sub-config for each rule is an option, the schema doesn't currently support it but it wouldn't be too major of a change.

@lowlydba
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah, the breaking change aspect does make it a bit more nuanced.

This is probably a low-priority change, but might be useful to integrate for new rules that create/alter tables as they come up. For now we'll probably add guidance on using the exclusion comments for these scenarios.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Apr 27, 2022

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the stale label Apr 27, 2022
@nathan-boyd nathan-boyd removed the stale label Apr 28, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants