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

add note about sync behavior family #49

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

alexandriainfantino
Copy link
Contributor

adds sync_behavior_family to the list of gitlink sync attributes

Copy link

linear bot commented Mar 20, 2024

@@ -308,3 +308,4 @@ Please refer to this section on the different parameters and their values a sync
* `should_send_recovery` - (Type: Boolean) Indicate if you would like an email when the sync recovers from the alert type.
* `options` - (Type: Object) Properties specific to the alert type. One example below, these will differ by type.
* `threshold` - (Optional, Type: Integer) The percentage of records that need to fail to send a record failing notification. Possible values are `0` - `100`.
* `sync_behavior_family` - (Optional, Type: String) The behavior of how the sync treats records. Either `activateEvents` - Take action in the destination when new data is added to the source dataset, or, `mappedRecords` - Replicate changes from the source dataset to the destination
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can you plz add some details as to why it's Optional, and what activateEvents, mappedRecords, or null do differently?

and if it only applies for some kinds of syncs, can you add when it should be specified?

I'm a dev reading this and I don't get it atm :/

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

for sure!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

added some more context, let me know if it reads better!

@n8 n8 removed their request for review April 15, 2024 16:04
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.

3 participants