Free and Premium dbt Labs dbt-Analytics-Engineering Dumps Questions Answers

Update int_order_items by replacing:

{{ source('tpch', 'orders') }} → {{ ref('stg_tpch_orders') }}

{{ source('tpch', 'lineitem') }} → {{ ref('stg_tpch_line_items') }}

In dbt’s recommended modeling pattern, sources should be referenced only in the staging layer. Downstream models (intermediate and mart/fact models) should reference staging models via ref(), not the raw source() directly. This keeps all raw-to-clean logic centralized in the staging layer and makes refactoring and documentation easier.

In the original DAG, int_order_items depends directly on tpch.orders and tpch.lineitem via source(), and staging models also depend on those same sources. That creates parallel paths from the sources and breaks the clean layered architecture.

By updating the int_order_items SQL to use:

from {{ ref('stg_tpch_orders') }}

join {{ ref('stg_tpch_line_items') }} ...

instead of:

from {{ source('tpch', 'orders') }}

join {{ source('tpch', 'lineitem') }} ...

you ensure that int_order_items sits entirely downstream of the staging layer. The new DAG becomes linear: sources → staging → intermediate (int_order_items) → any further marts. This improves modularity, reusability of cleaned logic, and makes the DAG easier to reason about and maintain.

In dbt’s recommended layered modeling architecture, the staging layer is intended to provide a clean, one-to-one representation of raw source tables. Each stg_ model should depend only on sources, not on other staging models. This ensures staging remains a simple, transparent layer where data is renamed, recast, standardized, and lightly transformed before being passed to intermediate and mart layers.

In the DAG shown, at least one staging model (for example, stg_line_items or stg_tpch_line_items) appears downstream of another staging model, meaning a stg_ model is referencing another stg_ model. This violates dbt’s recommended modeling practice, because it creates unnecessary complexity in the staging layer and reduces modularity and transparency. Downstream layers such as intermediate (int_) and marts (fct_) should be used to combine, enrich, or join multiple staging outputs.

When staging models depend on each other, it becomes harder to trace lineage, reduces clarity about where transformations occur, and complicates the entire DAG. The proper pattern is:

Sources → Staging (stg_) → Intermediate (int_) → Marts (fct_)

Since the DAG shows staging models referencing other staging models, the rules have indeed been violated.

In dbt, the Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) is created from model dependencies, which dbt identifies only through two mechanisms: the ref() function for referencing dbt models and the source() function for referencing declared sources. These functions are explicitly designed to tell dbt how models relate to each other so that dbt can track lineage, enforce build order, and generate documentation.

Option A, {{ source('source', 'table') }}, correctly references a declared source. Any model using source() establishes an upstream dependency on that source table. dbt will therefore draw a lineage line in the DAG from the source to the model.

Option B, {{ ref('stg_jaffle_shop__customers') }}, is the canonical way to reference another dbt model. ref() ensures dbt determines dependencies at compile time, and thus creates a DAG edge between this model and its parent.

The remaining options do not create lineage:

C directly references a database object, which dbt cannot interpret as a dependency.

D uses a Jinja variable unrelated to lineage.

E is invalid, because source() requires two arguments: a source name and table name, not a dotted string.

Therefore, A and B are the only valid answers.

Modularity in dbt means breaking transformations into small, reusable steps that are easy to reason about, test, and reuse. In this DAG, two staging models (stg_detail_categories and stg_details) feed into two mart-level models (skills_with_details and lessons_with_details). If there is repeated logic in those two mart models—such as common joins, filters, or derived fields—that logic is a good candidate to be extracted into an intermediate model.

Option E follows dbt best practices: inspect the SQL of lessons_with_details and skills_with_details and identify shared logic to move into a new intermediate model (for example, int_details_with_categories). Both downstream models can then reference this intermediate model using ref(), centralizing logic and improving maintainability.

Options A and B push joins/unions into the staging layer, which should focus on clean, 1:1 representations of sources—not combining multiple sources. Option C collapses distinct staging models into one, reducing clarity and breaking the source-to-staging contract. Option D creates an overly wide, less reusable final table instead of focusing on shared reusable logic.

Therefore, the action that truly increases modularity is Option E: creating an intermediate model based on common SQL patterns.

Information Type

Retrieved From

Singular tests

C. .sql files

Column data types

A. Data platform information schema

Generic tests

B. .yml configuration

SQL code

C. .sql files

Column descriptions

B. .yml configuration

Model dependencies

C. .sql files

The dbt docs command compiles metadata about your project by gathering information from three primary sources: your warehouse’s information schema, your YAML configuration files, and your SQL model files. Understanding which metadata comes from which source is essential for debugging and for effective documentation practices.

Singular tests live inside .sql files within the /tests directory. Since dbt renders these tests directly from SQL files, their definitions appear in documentation sourced from that location.

Column data types come from the warehouse itself. dbt introspects the data platform information schema to retrieve actual types because dbt does not infer or define column types—only the warehouse does.

Generic tests (e.g., unique, not_null, accepted_values) are declared in .yml files. These YAML definitions contain test configurations, descriptions, and parameters, which dbt uses to document and execute these tests.

SQL code for models is naturally sourced from .sql files where the models are defined. This includes logic such as SELECT statements, CTEs, and transformations.

Column descriptions are written exclusively in .yml files. dbt never extracts descriptions from SQL comments—only from YAML.

Model dependencies come from the ref() and source() calls inside .sql model files, which dbt parses to build the DAG.

In dbt, Jinja runs at compile time and operates only on Python objects that exist in the Jinja context (variables, lists, dictionaries, etc.). The tasks inside your with clause:

with tasks as (

select * from {{ ref('stg_tasks') }}

)

defines a SQL CTE named tasks, not a Jinja variable. Jinja cannot iterate over a SQL CTE; it can only loop over a Python iterable that has been created or passed into the template. Because there is no Jinja variable named tasks defined with something like:

{% set tasks = ['task_a', 'task_b', 'task_c'] %}

the for task in tasks loop has nothing to iterate over. As a result, the entire loop body is effectively skipped during compilation, and the compiled SQL only contains:

select

user_id,

with no generated case when expressions.

Option A is incorrect because loop.last is only needed for formatting (e.g., commas), not for the loop to render. Option B is wrong because Jinja control structures correctly use {% %}, while {{ }} is for output. Option D is irrelevant to compilation; missing columns would cause a runtime database error, not an empty compiled block.

Therefore, the problem is that no Jinja variable tasks was defined, making C the correct answer.

In dbt, grants can be configured globally, at the project level, or directly inside a model using the config() function. When a grant is set in dbt_project.yml, it becomes a base definition, and individual models may extend (append to) or override that configuration.

According to dbt documentation, prefixing a grant with a plus sign (+) means “extend the list defined in higher-level configurations.”

Thus, if the project-level config already sets:

select: ['reporter']

…and a model needs to add an additional role (here, bi) without removing the existing one, the correct syntax is:

{{ config(grants = { '+select': ['bi'] }) }}

This tells dbt: “Take the existing grant list (reporter) and append bi to it.”

Option B is incorrect because '+bi' is not a valid grants syntax.

Option C is invalid because grants do not use an inherits parameter.

Option D is invalid because include: is not a grants configuration key.

Therefore, Option A correctly applies dbt’s documented merging behavior for grants.

The selector source_status:fresher+ depends entirely on freshness metadata created by a previous dbt source freshness run. Source freshness results are stored in artifacts, and the --state flag points dbt to the location where these artifacts were previously generated. Without first running dbt source freshness, dbt has no stored freshness status and therefore cannot filter sources by “fresher” status. This makes option A required.

Additionally, source freshness checks only work when sources include a freshness block in their YAML configuration. This block specifies the loaded_at_field and the warn_after / error_after thresholds. If no freshness block exists, dbt does not compute freshness at all, meaning such sources cannot appear in the source_status:fresher+ selector. Therefore D is also required.

Options B and E are unrelated to source freshness artifacts and do not contribute to the preconditions for this selector. Option C does not impact freshness logic, as generic tests have no role in generating freshness metadata.

Thus, the two prerequisites are:

Running dbt source freshness (to create freshness metadata).

Defining a freshness configuration on the relevant sources.

Drops and recreates a definition of a query which is executed at the time it's referenced

✅ view

Inserts or updates records of an existing object in the warehouse using a delta

✅ incremental

Code belonging to the model is inserted into the places the model is referenced

✅ ephemeral

Drops and recreates an object in the warehouse as stored results when using dbt run

✅ table

Execute the last dbt command from the node point of failure.

Answer: retry

The --retry flag in dbt is specifically designed to re-execute a dbt command starting from the node where execution previously failed. In large DAGs, rebuilding all upstream models repeatedly is inefficient, especially when a downstream transformation is the only point of failure. dbt includes retry logic to support resiliency within orchestrated pipelines and CI/CD processes.

Using --retry allows dbt to leverage the metadata stored in the run_results.json to determine which model triggered the failure. Instead of re-running the entire DAG, dbt intelligently continues execution from the failed node, speeding up recovery and making iterative debugging far more efficient. This is particularly valuable in production pipelines where minimizing runtime is critical.

This behavior aligns with dbt’s philosophy of incremental, test-driven, modular development: failures should be isolated, reproducible, and simple to resume. By re-running only the subset of affected models, dbt improves developer productivity and orchestration reliability.

**Create a copy of an existing database object in a sandbox environment.

Answer: clone

The clone capability in dbt refers to creating a zero-copy clone (Snowflake) or snapshot-like duplicated object using the data platform's native features. This is extremely useful when developers or analysts need a safe sandbox environment to test transformations, experiment, or validate logic without affecting production data.

A clone operation duplicates the table or view metadata instantly without physically copying data, which is both cost-efficient and fast. dbt leverages this through commands such as dbt clone (dbt Cloud) or through adapters that support cloning.

Sandboxes created via cloning allow engineers to develop safely by ensuring that testing and prototyping has no impact on production tables. Because cloned objects share underlying data blocks, they are nearly storage-free unless mutated—keeping warehouse costs low.

This practice is aligned with modern analytics engineering best practices where separation of environments (dev/test/prod) is essential for governance, data quality, and reproducibility.

**Run a subset of models or tests in a sandbox environment without having to first build their upstream parents.

Answer: defer

The --defer flag allows dbt to reference already-built objects from another environment—commonly production—so that developers can run only the models they are modifying, without recreating all upstream dependencies.

When combined with --state, dbt compares the working branch’s DAG with previously generated artifacts and determines which nodes should be rebuilt. Any upstream nodes not modified in the current branch are deferred, meaning dbt will point to the existing production-built version instead of materializing them again.

This dramatically speeds up development because staging layers or intermediate models, which may take significant computation time, do not need to be rebuilt for every developer iteration.

The mechanism also prevents accidental overwrites of production objects because deferred references always point to a safe, isolated schema established by state comparison.

This concept is central to dbt’s “safe development via deferral,” enabling rapid experimentation while ensuring consistency between dev and prod environments.

**Compare nodes against a previous version of the same nodes.

Answer: state

The --state flag allows dbt to compare the current project against a previously generated manifest. This enables dbt to determine which models have changed, which tests must be re-run, and how the DAG differs between two versions.

State comparison is foundational to features such as Slim CI, deferred builds, and change-aware testing. dbt reads the state directory—typically containing artifacts from a production run—and examines differences in SQL, configurations, macros, or schema definitions.

This allows dbt to selectively build only modified nodes, increasing efficiency in CI/CD pipelines and reducing unnecessary warehouse costs. Additionally, state comparison is used for validating backward compatibility, testing versioned models, or enforcing governance rules such as model contracts.

By comparing nodes to their historical equivalents, teams can adopt modern engineering strategies such as impact analysis, regression detection, and selective deployment. This capability aligns with dbt’s focus on modular analytics engineering and automated change management.

This error occurs because the YAML structure is incorrectly indented, causing dbt’s parser (and YAML itself) to misinterpret the test definitions. In dbt, generic tests must be declared as a list under the tests: key, but YAML is extremely sensitive to indentation levels. In the faulty YAML, unique and not_null are indented incorrectly relative to the tests: key, which produces the error: “mapping values are not allowed in this context.”

According to the dbt Testing documentation, valid generic test syntax follows this exact pattern:

columns:

- name: id

tests:

- unique

- not_null

The indentation under tests: must be consistent and aligned so that YAML interprets the items as list elements, not as malformed mappings. When indentation is wrong, YAML attempts to parse list entries as key-value mappings, which leads to the error seen during compilation.

dbt does not require generic test names to be quoted, nor does it expect tests to be a dictionary. The test list format is correct—only the indentation is wrong. Therefore, the root cause is incorrect YAML indentation, making Option D correct.

Will always point to the latest version of the source schema

Correct Match: ✔ defer

Allows to use objects built in the target schema with any downstream tool

Correct Match: ✔ dbt clone

3️⃣ Allows to safely modify objects built in the target schema

Correct Match: ✔ defer

4️⃣ Is a point-in-time operation

Correct Match: ✔ dbt clone

defer and dbt clone serve very different purposes in dbt, and understanding their behavior is essential for choosing the right command.

The --defer flag tells dbt to use already-built objects from a previous environment (often production) instead of rebuilding them. Because it always references the existing target schema’s most recent objects, it “always points to the latest version of the source schema.” Since no objects are overwritten when using defer, it also “allows safely modifying objects built in the target schema”—your development environment uses production objects without altering them.

By contrast, dbt clone creates a point-in-time copy of existing relations. This cloned schema is static; it does not auto-update when source data changes. Therefore, clone is classified as a “point-in-time operation.” Since clone copies physical tables/views into a new schema, downstream tools (BI dashboards, ML pipelines) can safely query the cloned environment without affecting production, making “allows to use objects built in the target schema with any downstream tool” the correct match.

Thus, defer is used for logic substitution without copies, while clone is used for replicable, point-in-time snapshots.

The behavior described—dbt running the orders model as a view despite being explicitly configured as a table—indicates that dbt is not correctly detecting or applying the model-level configuration during compilation. dbt relies heavily on the target-path directory to write compiled SQL, manifest files, and run artifacts. If the target-path is misconfigured, pointing to a location that dbt does not handle correctly or that overlaps with another folder used internally, dbt may fail to load the correct configuration from the merged project settings.

When dbt cannot locate the compiled configuration for a model, it defaults to its standard materialization type, which is view. This explains why the logs show:

“Finished running 1 view model”

even though the dbt_project.yml clearly declares:

materialized: table.

Additionally, the logs indicate no warnings or parsing errors, meaning dbt ran successfully but with incorrect settings—another indicator of configuration metadata being overridden or misplaced due to an incorrect target-path.

By resolving the target-path issue, dbt will successfully load the model configuration and materialize the orders model as a table as intended.

The correct answers are B and E.

The dbt retry command was introduced to help developers quickly re-run only what failed in the prior dbt invocation. According to dbt documentation, dbt retry examines metadata from the previous execution, including the run results and the manifest.json, to determine which nodes failed. This aligns with Option E, as dbt uses the manifest to identify the models, tests, and other nodes that errored or were not executed successfully.

Option B is also correct because dbt retry works only when the previous run failed due to execution errors (e.g., a warehouse failure or a logic error in SQL). If the failure was due to a syntax error that prevented dbt from compiling, there will be no valid manifest produced, so retry cannot execute. Thus, dbt retry can only re-run models when the previous failure occurred after successful compilation.

Options A and C are incorrect because retry does not run all nodes nor does it automatically pick up exactly where an execution stopped — instead, it runs failed and downstream unbuilt nodes as determined by the manifest. Option D is also incorrect; retry uses the execution metadata, not selectors, to determine what should run.

1. There is a config block at the top of the model with materialized = 'table'

➡️ Answer: False

2. The corresponding table already exists in the data warehouse

➡️ Answer: True

3. The incremental model was executed with the --full-refresh flag

➡️ Answer: False

4. The corresponding table does not already exist in the data warehouse

➡️ Answer: False

The is_incremental() macro in dbt is used within an incremental model to determine whether the current invocation should perform an incremental update or a full rebuild. It evaluates to True only during an incremental run when the target table already exists in the data warehouse and dbt is not performing a full refresh.

For is_incremental() to return True, two conditions must be met:

The model must be materialized as incremental, not table or view.Therefore, if the config specifies materialized = 'table', the model is not incremental, and the function evaluates to False.

The table already exists in the target schema.In this case, dbt will run the model in incremental mode, making is_incremental() return **True`.

If the incremental model is run with --full-refresh, dbt intentionally rebuilds the entire table, meaning is_incremental() evaluates to False, even if the table exists.

Lastly, if the target table does not exist yet, dbt must create it from scratch, so the run is treated as a full rebuild, not an incremental update, causing is_incremental() to evaluate to False.

Thus, the only scenario where is_incremental() returns True is when the table exists and the model is actually incremental.

Here is the correct sequence:

Correct Order

sources:

- name: blue (source definition)

tables:

- name: yellow (table definition)

columns:

- name: red (column definition + tests)

In dbt, source documentation follows a strict YAML hierarchy. At the top level, the sources: key declares that you are defining source metadata. Inside this block, each source is listed as an item beginning with - name:. Therefore, the snippet describing the source (blue) must come immediately after sources:.

Next, dbt requires a tables: block inside each source to define the raw tables belonging to that source. Thus, the snippet containing tables: must follow the source definition. The table description (yellow) is then placed directly under this key because it represents a table within that source.

Finally, dbt allows column-level metadata under a columns: block inside a table definition. Therefore, columns: appears next, followed by the snippet defining a specific column (red) which includes both a description and tests (unique, not_null).

Arranging the YAML in this hierarchical order ensures dbt can correctly assign documentation to the source object, the table object, and the individual column. Misordering these snippets would break the structure and prevent dbt from generating documentation properly.

The correct answer is B: By adding the configurations in dbt_project.yml within the package’s namespace.

dbt packages are installed as read-only code, meaning you should never modify files inside /dbt_packages, nor should you attempt to overwrite generated artifacts inside /target. Instead, dbt provides a clean and officially supported method for overriding or extending configurations on models from packages: using the dbt_project.yml file.

Each package comes with its own namespace, and users can override model-level configurations by referencing that namespace inside the models: section of dbt_project.yml. dbt merges project-level configurations with package-level defaults, and configurations defined in dbt_project.yml take precedence. This is the only correct and recommended way to override settings such as materializations, tags, schema, or custom config blocks on models imported through a package.

Option A is incorrect because packages.yml is used only to declare package dependencies—not to configure package models. Option C is incorrect because the ./target folder contains compiled and ephemeral artifacts that should never be edited. Option D is incorrect because modifying code in /dbt_packages violates dbt best practices and will be overwritten each time packages are reinstalled.

Therefore, overriding configurations must be done exclusively through dbt_project.yml.

model_a contains an in-model config explicitly setting:

{{ config(materialized = "view") }}

In dbt, in-model config overrides project-level config, including folder-level defaults. Even though the staging/ folder is configured as:

staging:

+materialized: ephemeral

…this does not apply because the in-file config has higher precedence.

So model_a is materialized as a view.

A view in dbt is not persisted as data; instead, it stores the SQL definition. When a downstream query selects from that view, the database executes the underlying SQL at query time. As a result:

Queries run slower than selecting from a table, because the underlying computation happens each time.

But the data is always up to date, because views read directly from the current underlying tables.

This matches Option C.

Why the other options are wrong

A & D describe table behavior (faster queries, data only as fresh as last run). model_a is not materialized as a table.

B is incorrect because views are fully queryable; no error occurs.

The purpose of this question is to determine how to validate that the input values in the state column support the business logic that determines the is_active field. Since the logic checks whether state = 'Active', it is critical that the state column only contains values that the business process expects. In the example shown, acceptable states appear to be: 'active', 'churned', and 'trial'.

The correct way to enforce this expectation is to apply an accepted_values test on the state column. This ensures that any unexpected state (e.g., 'inactive', 'pending', 'deleted', or NULL) will cause the test to fail, alerting the team that the upstream system is producing unexpected or invalid values. Additionally, adding not_null ensures every user record contains a valid state.

Option A is the only configuration that applies the accepted values test to the correct column (state) and reflects the expected domain of values.

Options B and D incorrectly apply tests to the derived column is_active, not the source column that needs validation. Option C only checks nullability and uniqueness, which does not validate the range of allowed values and thus does not protect the business logic.

Therefore, Option A is the only correct answer.