Update filter in filtered reply times CTE in int_zendesk__reply_time_combined

[fivetran-reneeli]

PR Overview

This PR will address the following Issue/Feature:
#131

It was discovered that some tickets were not persisting through the final sla policies model, and mistakenly filtered out at the int_zendesk__reply_time_combined model.

This PR will result in the following new package version:

v0.13.2

Please provide the finalized CHANGELOG entry which details the relevant changes included in this PR:

Bug Fixes

• Updated the int_zendesk__reply_time_combined model to account for when a ticket is first replied to outside SLA schedules or not yet replied to.

Under the Hood

• Adjusted the filter used in the filtered_reply_times CTE for business hours to account for the aforementioned cases, as these records were mistakenly being filtered out previously.

PR Checklist

Basic Validation

Please acknowledge that you have successfully performed the following commands locally:

• dbt run –full-refresh && dbt test
• dbt run (if incremental models are present) && dbt test

Before marking this PR as "ready for review" the following have been applied:

• The appropriate issue has been linked, tagged, and properly assigned

• All necessary documentation and version upgrades have been applied

• docs were regenerated (unless this PR does not include any code or yml updates)

• BuildKite integration tests are passing

• Detailed validation steps have been provided below

• tested with internal data, validations linked in height ticket

Detailed Validation

Please share any and all of your validation steps:

• Confirmed the missing tickets were showing up prior to the int_zendesk__reply_time_combined model, and confirmed they are in fact expected to exist in the end models and not be filtered out. Then adjusted the filters in the filtered reply times CTE, ran the package, and confirmed that the tickets persisted in the end sla policies model.

If you had to summarize this PR in an emoji, which would it be?

📆

[fivetran-joemarkiewicz]

@fivetran-reneeli great job on working on this tricky bugfix! I do have a few questions included in my review that I would like you to take a look at before this will be ready to be approved. Let me know if you have any questions!

[fivetran-joemarkiewicz]

@fivetran-reneeli thanks again for working through this PR. This is looking really good, I just have a few final questions and suggestions before this should be good to approve.

Let me know if you want to chat about any of these final comments in more detail.

[fivetran-joemarkiewicz]

Thanks for applying these changes @fivetran-reneeli! This looks good to go from my end. Be sure to regen the docs and then this is ready for release review.

[fivetran-joemarkiewicz]

Consolidating this into PR #136