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

[ISSUE] Incremental File Listing not working as expected #886

Open
SomanathSankaran opened this issue Feb 12, 2025 · 0 comments
Open

[ISSUE] Incremental File Listing not working as expected #886

SomanathSankaran opened this issue Feb 12, 2025 · 0 comments

Comments

@SomanathSankaran
Copy link

Description
When using the notebooks_modified_after parameter with the wobj.workspace.list() method to filter notebooks based on modification time, it returns only 1 notebook, whereas manually filtering the notebooks using the x.modified_at property gives the expected 10 notebooks. Both methods should ideally return the same number of notebooks.

Reproduction
python
Copy

Method 1: Using notebooks_modified_after

for x in wobj.workspace.list("/Workspace/Users/abc", notebooks_modified_after=1719072458045, recursive=True):
print(x)

Method 2: Manually checking modified_at

for x in wobj.workspace.list("/Workspace/Users/abc", recursive=True):
if x.modified_at > 1719072458045:
print(x)
Expected Behavior
Both methods should return the same number of notebooks, ideally 10 notebooks. However, Method 1 only returns 1 notebook, while Method 2 returns 10 notebooks.

Is It a Regression?
This behavior has not worked as expected in the current version. The issue has been observed in the current implementation of the SDK, and the number of notebooks returned by both methods should match.

Debug Logs
Debugging logs were enabled using:

python
Copy
import logging
logging.basicConfig(level=logging.DEBUG)
However, the logs don’t indicate any clear differences between the two methods.

Environment Information
OS: [e.g., macOS]
SDK Version: [e.g., 0.1.0]
Python Version: [e.g., 3.8]
Additional Context
Timestamp used: 1719072458045 (This value is the same for both methods).
The issue seems to be related to how the notebooks_modified_after parameter is processed in Method 1.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant