An upstream team corrected missing values and resent the same processing date.
Keep the former violation result and verify the corrected version against the standard.
Which quality approach is most appropriate?
Record input, rule, and run versions, then execute a new quality run and compare it with the prior result.
Detailed explanation
The old and new outcomes remain comparable and traceable.
The old and new outcomes remain comparable and traceable.
The former violation and correction history disappear.
The former violation and correction history disappear.
Comparison and audit evidence are lost.
Comparison and audit evidence are lost.
An API call does not prove that data content passed quality checks.
An API call does not prove that data content passed quality checks.
Check official documentation
Compare the following points with the official documentation.
AWS Glue Data Quality results、job run、data versioningの公式説明を確認する。
What to confirm
結果の上書きと、旧新結果を比較できる再検査の違いを説明できる。
Key points
- Retest
- Input version
- Rule version
- Audit
Notes
- Environment: AWS公式DEA-C01試験ガイドと各サービスの公式ドキュメントの確認
- Confirm current AWS service behavior in the official DEA-C01 documentation.
Foundation review
Comparability
Use the same processing window and rule version when comparing old and new results.
Publication history
Record which quality run approved the data consumed downstream.