Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

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

Problem when configuring a connection using the API with two identical streams in different schemas in Postgres #38186

Closed
dantonbertuol opened this issue May 14, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@dantonbertuol
Copy link

Topic

API Connection

Relevant information

I am performing data integration between Postgres and MinIO.

In Postgres I have two schemas, "client_one" and "client_two", so I am filtering them when creating the source. In both schemas I have the "customers" table.

When I create a connection to S3, through the Airbyte UI, both streams are displayed to select, so I select both.

However, when I need to patch the connection via the API, and I enter the name of the table, Airbyte selects only one of the streams for replication, this must be a BUG because they both have the same name and via the API I don't have a way to differentiate them.

I'm running Airbyte 0.58.0 via Docker, on WSL 2.

Source Configuration:
source

Connection:
connection

Postman:
postman

Connection Updated via the API:
connection_updated

Video: https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/assets/32557284/76159010-f9c3-46ba-9e2b-b9bbd73cee70

@marcosmarxm
Copy link
Member

I requested assistance from the connector team regarding about this question. @dantonbertuol, I believe a temporary solution is to create separate connections for each schema. Set distinct prefixes for the tables so they are easily identifiable in the destination database.

@airbytehq airbytehq locked and limited conversation to collaborators May 16, 2024
@marcosmarxm marcosmarxm converted this issue into discussion #38293 May 16, 2024

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants