ntd: fix failing tests #3991
Open
ntd: fix failing tests #3991
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
charlie-costanzo
added
the
data-pipeline-ingestion-and-modeling
charlie-costanzo
force-pushed
the
ntd-resolve-failing-tests
branch
from
3db9874 to
6a69d59
Compare
charlie-costanzo
requested review from
evansiroky,
vevetron,
tiffanychu90,
ohrite,
erikamov,
mjumbewu and
themightychris
as code owners
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Since creating our uniqueness tests in our mart tables for ingested NTD endpoints, we've discovered bad rows in various tables related to reporting by the same providers (primarily 'Advance Transit, Inc. NH', 'Southern Teton Area Rapid Transit', and 'Greyhound')
This PR changes the location of our key generation to detect bad data earlier in the pipeline, and hardcodes out these bad rows
Resolves #[issue]
Type of change
How has this been tested?
Post-merge follow-ups