Replies: 4 comments 5 replies
-
|
Hey @ampil! 👋 I'm here to help you with any questions or issues you have. I can assist with bugs, answer your questions, and even guide you on becoming a contributor. Let's tackle this together! The best practices for storing Superset dashboards in Git for version control include:
Here is a more efficient way to handle this process:
Example code snippet to export dashboards: from superset.commands.dashboard.export import ExportDashboardsCommand
# Export a specific dashboard by its ID
dashboard_id = 1 # Replace with the actual dashboard ID
export_command = ExportDashboardsCommand([dashboard_id])
for file_name, file_content_callable in export_command.run():
file_content = file_content_callable()
with open(file_name, 'w') as file:
file.write(file_content)This approach leverages the existing |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Our team explored two competing approaches for organizing dashboard configuration files. Approach 1: Centralized Directory StructureIn this approach, all dashboard YAML files were stored in a common folder hierarchy, as follows: Approach 2: Individual Dashboard FoldersThis approach involved creating a separate folder for each dashboard, organizing data as follows: DecisionWe opted for the second approach. It offers several significant advantages over the first:
Hope it helps other Superset fellows :) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@ampil Thanks for the highlighting the approaches. I was trying to implementation the similar approach of your approach 2. Wondering to ask to get some reference with sample yaml for dashboard/dataset/charts? Will you be help me with some lights or some reference link to have a look? Much appreciated for your response. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm dumping automatically the result of Superset export ZIP into a Git repository for traceability/history/indexation and came upon this thread. I'm facing a weird behaviour where some IDs change in the dashboard exports even though nothing changed in the dashboards themselves. Is this expected? This makes the "history" feature less interesting due to commits with "fake changes". Here's an example of such a "fake changes/diff" that I observe in a dashboard yaml export: parents:
- ROOT_ID
type: TABS
- CHART-VAEM8ECF:
+ CHART-FU08RIS4:
children: []
id: CHART-VAEM8ECF
id: CHART-FU08RIS4
meta:
chartId: 1347
height: 50
...
uuid: 9dfdd1dc-5808-4c33-bb7d-f46712891c58
width: 4
type: CHART
- CHART-OYGMTK86:
+ CHART-4J8783D4:
children: []
- id: CHART-OYGMTK86
+ id: CHART-4J8783D4
meta:
chartId: 1333
height: 50 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi all,
I'm exploring the best practices for storing Superset dashboards in Git for version control purposes.
I haven’t come across many articles or discussions on this topic, so I wanted to reach out to the community for guidance.
Currently, my team and I follow this approach:
Legal_Information_40.yamlbecomesLegal_Information.yaml)As a result, each folder has a bunch of YAML-files. We don't store zip-archives.
Does this workflow align with best practices, or is there a more efficient way to handle version control for Superset dashboards? Any feedback, suggestions, or resources would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks in advance!
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions