# Description
Fixes issue
# Checklist
- [ ] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [ ] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [ ] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [ ] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [ ] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
# Description
Update model core__verification_payments to include guest payment amounts without taxes
# Checklist
- [x] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [x] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [x] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [ ] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [ ] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
# Description
Remove .sql in the xero__bank_transaction_denom_mart, effectively fixing the tests that were not running + removing the following warnings:
```
06:15:13 [WARNING]: Did not find matching node for patch with name 'xero__bank_transaction_denom_mart.sql' in the 'models' section of file 'models/reporting/xero/schema.yml'
06:15:14 [WARNING]: Test 'test.dwh_dbt.not_null_xero__bank_transaction_denom_mart.sql_id_line_item.70cdeb323e' (models/reporting/xero/schema.yml) depends on a node named 'xero__bank_transaction_denom_mart.sql' in package '' which was not found
06:15:14 [WARNING]: Test 'test.dwh_dbt.unique_xero__bank_transaction_denom_mart.sql_id_line_item.b85e051d2d' (models/reporting/xero/schema.yml) depends on a node named 'xero__bank_transaction_denom_mart.sql' in package '' which was not found
```
# Checklist
- [X] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [ ] The edited models are sufficiently documented. *Have not checked*
- [X] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [ ] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs. *Have not checked*
- [ ] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models. *Have not checked*
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
# Description
This PR closes the ticket #20046
Changes:
* Removes temporary fields marked as legacy in `core__vr_check_in_cover`, after the changes in the 3 PBI Check-In Hero reports.
* Additionally, I modified the schema entry to comply with the current fields available in this model.
# Checklist
- [X] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data. *Checked in local changing the sources to localhost after dropping the fields.*
- [X] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [X] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [ ] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs. *N/A*
- [ ] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models. *N/A*
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
Remove temporary fields
Related work items: #20046
# Description
This PR adds an intermediate tables that holds a combo of all payaway plans with the months (technically, combinations of first day and last day of month) when the plan was the relevant one for invoicing purposes.
The goal is to have this as an intermediate helper for some tax related logic in verification payments.
# Checklist
- [X] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [X] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [X] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [X] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [X] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
Related work items: #20043
# Description
Brings the Payaway table from staging to intermediate.
The only significant change is that we change the internal Superhog currency id for the iso4217 code.
# Checklist
- [X] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [X] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [X] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [X] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [X] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
Related work items: #20043
# Description
Update mtd_aggregated_metrics guest payments to be tax-exclusive
# Checklist
- [x] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [x] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [x] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [ ] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [ ] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
Update mtd_aggregated_metrics guest payments to be tax-exclusive
Related work items: #20045
# Description
This PR propagates tax exclusive check in hero payments for the reporting of Check in Hero.
Additionally, it keeps propagating the amounts with tax inclusiveness in case, at some point, we need them. These are with the new naming convention.
In order not to break anything, the previous amounts are duplicated and aliased in reporting.
Lastly, I spent some time adding some clarifications and documenting payments set to currency and the dependant used for check in hero.
# Checklist
- [X] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [X] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [X] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [X] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [X] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
Related work items: #20046
# Description
Exposure for e-deposit invoice
# Checklist
- [ ] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [ ] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [ ] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [ ] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [ ] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
Exposure for e-deposit invoice
Related work items: #20124
# Description
Fixing logic to ensure priority selection of claims when user satisfies multiple claim conditions.
It adds a new parameter that forcefully prioritises the selection of the date value for a certain claim over the others. If the value is repeated among claims, it will select the earliest date.
# Checklist
- [X] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [X] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [X] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [X] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [X] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
Related work items: #20773
# Description
This PR fixes the New Dash migration issue that happened on September 10th 2024. In this migration, users were directly assigned the claim of KygMvp that does not contain a date value. We were using a default hardcode of the first MVP migration, thus in DWH all users have been considered to be migrated late July instead of splitting the first 22 in late July and the ~200 others in September.
The issue lies in the fact that users have configured a ProductBundle and can have Bookings with ProductBundle BEFORE the migration date, which greatly breaks the logic of a migration monitoring.
Changes:
* New migration phase added based on the claim MvpMigratedUser, that Ben created on Friday 13th
* Adaptation of the code in int_core__user_migration to detect if the claim_value (a text field) has a date or not. If so, use that date as long as it's equal or greater than the deployment date, if not use the deployment date. If the claim does not contain a date, use the deployment date (this is the case for the first true 22 migrated users)
I checked that volumes now look correct with this fix.
# Checklist
- [X] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [X] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [X] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [X] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [X] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
Related work items: #20773
# Description
removing duplicates from guesty and removing tests for edeposit_users and edeposit_verification_fees until further notice
# Checklist
- [x] The edited models and dependants run properly with production data.
- [x] The edited models are sufficiently documented.
- [x] The edited models contain PK tests, and I've ran and passed them.
- [x] I have checked for DRY opportunities with other models and docs.
- [x] I've picked the right materialization for the affected models.
# Other
- [ ] Check if a full-refresh is required after this PR is merged.
removing duplicates from guesty and removing tests for edeposit_users
Related work items: #20125
