style: whitespace and comment-only edits in staging models

[even-wei]

Summary

Pure formatting changes to two staging models — no semantic change.

• stg_customers.sql: add blank lines between CTEs / within SELECT; reformat section dividers from ---------- ids style to -- ================= identifiers ================= style.
• stg_locations.sql: replace terse column-group dividers with descriptive inline comments per column; uppercase final SELECT * FROM renamed.

Compiled SQL parses to an identical AST. Intended as an example PR for testing that Recce's change classifier treats AST-equal edits as unchanged rather than non_breaking.

Test plan

• dbt parse succeeds
• dbt compile --select stg_customers stg_locations produces no row-level diff vs. base
• Recce lineage diff classifies both nodes as unchanged (not non_breaking)

[recce-cloud]

Summary

PR #17 applies purely cosmetic styling and whitespace edits to two staging models (stg_customers.sql and stg_locations.sql) with zero semantic changes to compiled SQL. Row count and profile analyses confirm these changes have no data impact: stg_customers maintains 935 rows, stg_locations maintains 6 rows, and all statistical distributions (nullness, distinct counts, min/max values) remain identical across both environments. The 51 downstream models that depend on these staging models are unaffected and do not require revalidation.

---

Key Changes

File Modifications:

• models/staging/stg_customers.sql: +9 lines, -2 lines (formatting: blank lines between CTEs, section divider reformatting)
• models/staging/stg_locations.sql: +5 lines, -5 lines (inline comments per column, uppercase final SELECT)

Data Quality Validation Results (Recce):

• Schema diff: ✅ 0 changes — Both models retain exact column structure
• Row count comparison: ✅ Identical — stg_customers: 935 → 935 rows, stg_locations: 6 → 6 rows
• Profile diff: ✅ All statistics match — Nullness, distinctness, min/max values unchanged across all columns
• Lineage classification: ✅ Unmodified — Recce marks both models as change_status: null (no semantic changes detected)

AST Verification: PR description correctly states compiled SQL is AST-equal; Recce analysis confirms zero schema/data divergence.

---

Impact Analysis

Downstream Dependency Graph:

51 models and exposures depend on these staging models through the lineage chain, with dim_customer_360 serving as the primary hub:

• Direct consumers: dim_customer_360 (aggregates both stg_customers and stg_locations)
• Secondary impact: 37 models depend on dim_customer_360 for customer dimensions
• Critical consumers: wide_daily_business_summary, wide_weekly_business_summary, mkt_customer_lifecycle_stage, rpt_high_value_customer_profile, exec_customer_health_index
• Exposures affected: 4 downstream exposures (weekly_business_review, marketing_analytics, ml_churn_prediction, crm_sync)

Impact Status: All 51 downstream nodes are marked as impacted: true (dependency exists) but change_status: null (no modifications required), confirming the dependency graph is correctly understood and no downstream model recompilation is needed.

Mermaid DAG (from Recce lineage analysis):

Staging Models (Unmodified):
  stg_customers (view) - 935 rows
  stg_locations (view) - 6 rows

Direct Dependencies:
  dim_customer_360 (table) - Hub model for 37 downstream consumers
  
Sample Downstream Nodes (51 total models + exposures):
  - wide_daily_business_summary
  - wide_weekly_business_summary  
  - mkt_customer_lifecycle_stage
  - rpt_high_value_customer_profile
  - exec_customer_health_index
  + 46 additional models and exposures

All downstream: impacted=true, change_status=null (unmodified)

---

---

☑️ Checklist

Check	Type	Status	Impact
6-163-17-1 · Schema Diff for stg_customers and stg_locations	Schema Diff	✅ Approved	PR #17 contains styling and whitespace-only edits to stg_customers.sql and stg_locations.sql. Schema diff analysis confirms zero column changes detected for both models. No columns added, removed, or type-changed between base and current environments. This aligns with the PR description stating compiled SQL is AST-equal.
6-163-17-2 · Row Count Diff for stg_customers and stg_locations	Row Count Diff	✅ Approved	PR #17 styling edits produce zero row count impact. stg_customers maintains 935 records in both base and current environments. stg_locations maintains 6 records in both environments. Complete stability across all modified models confirms no semantic SQL changes.
6-163-17-3 · Profile Diff for stg_customers	Profile Diff	✅ Approved	Data distribution analysis for stg_customers shows identical profiles between base and current. CUSTOMER_ID remains fully unique (935 distinct values). CUSTOMER_NAME maintains 930 distinct values with 99.47% distinctness. All statistical measures (nullness, uniqueness, cardinality) unchanged, confirming zero data impact from formatting edits.
6-163-17-4 · Profile Diff for stg_locations	Profile Diff	✅ Approved	Data distribution analysis for stg_locations shows identical profiles between base and current. All 4 columns maintain identical statistics: LOCATION_ID and LOCATION_NAME fully unique, TAX_RATE average 0.0596 with 5 distinct values, OPENED_DATE ranges from 2016-09-01 to 2019-09-13. Zero variance in data quality metrics confirms whitespace-only changes have no semantic impact.

💡 /update-check [ID] [Approve|Unapprove] [comment]

---

🔍 Suggested Actions

💡 Use /update-action [ID] Done to mark items — checkboxes are display-only

• sa-a1b2c3d4 Merge PR with confidence: Recce validation confirms zero semantic changes: row counts stable (935, 6), schema unchanged, all data profiles identical. Safe for production deployment. NEW
• sa-e5f6a7b8 Skip full downstream rebuild: All 51 downstream models remain unmodified (change_status: null). Incremental build optimization is applicable. NEW
• sa-c9d0e1f2 Document formatting standards: Use stg_customers.sql and stg_locations.sql as reference for dbt model code style (section dividers, CTE spacing, inline comments) NEW

---

Was this summary helpful? 👍 👎