Any reason why the datamodel returned by `prisma introspect` Prisma #orm-help

Any reason why the datamodel returned by `prisma i...

09/01/2018, 7:03 PM

Any reason why the datamodel returned by

prisma introspect

on an existing postgres db can't be then deployed? Just a limitation of the tool as it currently is?

prisma deploy

says there are lots of small errors with the datamodel file.

noahdavis

09/01/2018, 9:09 PM

Can we see you datamodel file?

09/04/2018, 5:39 AM

It's pretty massive and I would have to anonymise the field names a bit first, as it's all confidential IP.

09/04/2018, 6:06 AM

Can I give you a smaller sample and the matching errors?

09/04/2018, 10:57 AM

Well, here's the first error:

Copy code

Error: Syntax error while parsing GraphQL query. Invalid input ""collection-owner")\n  object-", expected Argument, FieldDefinition, Directive, Comments or Value (line 944, column 35):
  id: ID! @unique @pgColumn(name: "collection-owner")

09/04/2018, 11:05 AM

Fortunately that table isn't necessary, so I can just omit it entirely. Once that is done, though:

Copy code

Errors:

  Pms_sip_rt
    ✖ The field `id` is reserved and has to have the format: id: ID! @unique or id: UUID! @unique.

  Sip_phone_buttons_blf
    ✖ The field `id` is reserved and has to have the format: id: ID! @unique or id: UUID! @unique.

  Sip_phone_buttons_conference
    ✖ The field `id` is reserved and has to have the format: id: ID! @unique or id: UUID! @unique.

  Sip_phone_buttons_customdial
    ✖ The field `id` is reserved and has to have the format: id: ID! @unique or id: UUID! @unique.

  Sip_phone_buttons_featurecode
    ✖ The field `id` is reserved and has to have the format: id: ID! @unique or id: UUID! @unique.

  Sip_phone_buttons_line
    ✖ The field `id` is reserved and has to have the format: id: ID! @unique or id: UUID! @unique.

  Sip_phone_buttons_paginggroup
    ✖ The field `id` is reserved and has to have the format: id: ID! @unique or id: UUID! @unique.

  Sip_phone_buttons_speeddial
    ✖ The field `id` is reserved and has to have the format: id: ID! @unique or id: UUID! @unique.

  Users
    ✖ The type `Users` has a duplicate fieldName.
    ✖ The type `Users` has a duplicate fieldName.
    ✖ Invalid value '1999-12-31 11:00:00+00' for type DateTime.

  Call_me_chat_logins
    ✖ Invalid value '1999-12-31 11:00:00+00' for type DateTime.

  Status_settings
    ✖ The field `base` specifies a directive more than once. Directives must appear exactly once on a field.
    ✖ The field `status_settings_bases` specifies a directive more than once. Directives must appear exactly once on a field.
    ✖ The field `status_settings_timer_change_statuses` specifies a directive more than once. Directives must appear exactly once on a field.
    ✖ The field `timer_change_status` specifies a directive more than once. Directives must appear exactly once on a field.

09/04/2018, 11:06 AM

Obviously I can fix these but I want to know if that's expected for a large legacy postgres db that there will be some errors trying to deploy the file produced by

prisma introspection

09/04/2018, 11:23 AM

Even when those simple ones are fixed, still, deploy says is declaring a syntax error on any

@pgTable

@pgRelation

directive, e.g.

Copy code

Error: Syntax error while parsing GraphQL query. Invalid input ""server_id")\n  user_id: ID! @unique!", expected Value, Argument, Directive or FieldDefinition (line 32, column 48):

09/04/2018, 11:23 AM

Even when those simple ones are fixed, still, deploy says is declaring a syntax error on any

@pgTable

@pgRelation

directive, e.g.

Copy code

Error: Syntax error while parsing GraphQL query. Invalid input ""buddy_error_log") {\n  id: ID! @unique\n  datetime: DateTime\n  extension: String!\n  line: Int\n  msg: String\n  parent_url: String!\n  stacktrace: String\n  url: String\n  user_agent: String!\n  user_id: ID! @unique!", expected ValueConst, ArgumentConst, DirectiveConst or FieldDefinitions (line 15, column 37):

Error: Syntax error while parsing GraphQL query. Invalid input ""server_id")\n  user_id: ID! @unique!", expected Value, Argument, Directive or FieldDefinition (line 32, column 48):

09/04/2018, 11:52 AM

Even though we can see it is the same style as https://github.com/prisma/prisma/blob/383f33674c5c07eeb5acef0492325b43a7bd7d52/docs/1.14/04-Reference/02-Service-Configuration/03-Data-Model/03-Introspection.md

09/05/2018, 12:53 PM

@nilan Any thoughts?

nilan

09/05/2018, 12:54 PM

Hey there. I don't have any thoughts on this at the moment 🙂 But if you share your reproduction example in a new issue, I'll take a look later. https://github.com/prisma/prisma/issues/new?template=bug_report.md

4 Views

Open in Slack

Previous Next