Skip to content

fix(weave): exempt started_at from float convert in saved view filters#7192

Open
gtarpenning wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
griffin/saved-view-started-at-no-float-convert
Open

fix(weave): exempt started_at from float convert in saved view filters#7192
gtarpenning wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
griffin/saved-view-started-at-no-float-convert

Conversation

@gtarpenning

@gtarpenning gtarpenning commented Jun 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

  • Numeric SavedView filters on started_at wrapped the DateTime64 column in $convert -> double, so the server emitted toFloat64OrNull(any(started_at)), which ClickHouse 25.12 rejects (*OrNull takes String only) -> 403 QueryIllegalTypeofArgumentError in prod.
  • Root cause: SDK FIELDS_NO_FLOAT_CONVERT only listed summary.weave.latency_ms. The frontend added started_at in #35256 (2025-10-13); the Python SDK (saved_view.py, ported in chore(weave): add option+click support to Name and Latency #4385) was never updated, so SDK-built queries kept casting it. This fixes that divergence.
  • Jira: WB-35575

Impact

Datadog last 15d: 16 failed read requests, 5 users / 4 entities. Read-only paths (/calls/stream_query, /calls/query_stats) -> no data loss; users get a 403 when filtering calls by started_at.

Testing

unit test asserts started_at/latency_ms stay bare $getField while JSON fields keep the $convert; fails on master with the exact prod payload.

A numeric filter on started_at wrapped the DateTime64 column in
$convert -> double, producing toFloat64OrNull(started_at) which
ClickHouse 25.12 rejects. The frontend already exempts started_at
(#35256); this brings the Python SDK to parity.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@wandbot-3000

wandbot-3000 Bot commented Jun 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jun 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

@gtarpenning gtarpenning marked this pull request as ready for review June 11, 2026 20:56
@gtarpenning gtarpenning requested a review from a team as a code owner June 11, 2026 20:56
@gtarpenning gtarpenning requested a review from jwlee64 June 11, 2026 23:15
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.

1 participant