-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 506
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
Backward compatibility from sql #1200
Comments
Import from SQL is supported with package |
@ukrbublik Thanks for this, I noticed one issue though, we have some custom operators like IN, |
What's your SQL that gives error? |
tried this prcdr_cd IN ('95911','95886','95816','95913','95912','95910','94690') AND adjudication_dt < '2025-03-11'" |
@ukrbublik Could it be because we are overriding certain operators : in, like, not_like etc, I noticed for the operators that is overridden, builder not loading properly from query ![]() |
For import you need to override
For export -
|
@ukrbublik I added as you mentioned :
It is printing the sqlObj properly like the following but not loading to the widget
|
@ukrbublik In the code you pointed, I don't see any override added for in operator |
when I add to load this query application_cd IN ('ACS', 'C25') AND adjudication_dt < '2025-03-12', it is only loading the date to the builder but application_cd is not there in the tree created,
I override my 'select_any_in' operator as I provided in the previous comment and that is consoling the sqlObj as in the previous comment, but for some reason it is not setting properly to the tree with the above warning |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Can we populate the query builder from the sql (backward compatibility), If I provide the WHERE clause logic can we populate the query builder? That'd be a great feature to have.
Describe the solution you'd like
A clear and concise description of what you want to happen.
Describe alternatives you've considered
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.
Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: