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 duckdb_api config #59

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 12, 2024
Merged

Conversation

jraymakers
Copy link
Contributor

In both the bindings and the api layers, set a (different) default value for the duckdb_api config.
Ensure this works whether or not the user provides an explicit config; if they do, ensure it's overridable.

The default duckdb_api value for the bindings layer is: node-neo-bindings
The default for the api layer (which most people will use) is: node-neo-api

Copy link
Contributor

@elefeint elefeint left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🥇 for the quality and quantity of testing.

],
});
});
test('overriding duckdb_api', async () => {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

overriding duckdb_api is not really expected (although possible). All layers above the closest-to-duckdb are expected to set custom_user_agent instead, which is additive (all layers will be preserved).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I needed to make at least the bindings layer overridable, so the api layer can override it. But I agree it's unclear whether the ability to override this at the api level is useful, even though I support it for completeness.

@jraymakers jraymakers merged commit 38c9273 into main Dec 12, 2024
3 checks passed
@jraymakers jraymakers deleted the jray/default-duckdb-api-config branch December 12, 2024 19:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants