Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

wip changes #38548

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: release
Choose a base branch
from
Open

wip changes #38548

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

vsvamsi1
Copy link
Contributor

@vsvamsi1 vsvamsi1 commented Jan 9, 2025

Description

Tip

Add a TL;DR when the description is longer than 500 words or extremely technical (helps the content, marketing, and DevRel team).

Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change. Add links to Notion, Figma or any other documents that might be relevant to the PR.

Fixes #Issue Number
or
Fixes Issue URL

Warning

If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid.

Automation

/ok-to-test tags="@tag.All"

🔍 Cypress test results

Caution

🔴 🔴 🔴 Some tests have failed.
Workflow run: https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/12684103794
Commit: ac60150
Cypress dashboard.
Tags: @tag.All
Spec:
The following are new failures, please fix them before merging the PR:

  1. cypress/e2e/Regression/Apps/CommunityIssues_Spec.ts
  2. cypress/e2e/Regression/Apps/MongoDBShoppingCart_spec.ts
  3. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/ActionExecution/Bug33601_spec.ts
  4. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Binding/API_with_List_Widget_spec.js
  5. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Binding/JSObjectToListWidget_Spec.ts
  6. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Binding/Table_Api_spec.js
  7. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/BugTests/SelectWidget_Bug9334_Spec.ts
  8. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Git/GitImport/GitImport_spec.js
  9. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Git/GitSync/GitSyncedApps_spec.js
  10. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Google/EnableGoogle_spec.js
  11. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/JSObject/JSObject_Tests_spec.ts
  12. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/OneClickBinding/TableWidget/OneClickBindingMysql_spec.ts
  13. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/OneClickBinding/TableWidget/Table_MongoDB_spec.ts
  14. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/PartialImportExport/PartialImportRegularApp.ts
  15. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/ListV2/DefaultSelectItem_spec.ts
  16. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Migration_Spec.js
  17. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Modal/Modal_spec.ts
  18. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/ApiTests/API_Bugs_Spec.js
  19. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/ApiTests/API_MultiPart_Spec.ts
  20. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD/MongoURI_Spec.ts
  21. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD/MySQL1_Spec.ts
  22. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD/MySQL2_Spec.ts
  23. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD/Postgres2_Spec.ts
  24. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/MySQL_Datatypes/Basic_Spec.ts
  25. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Postgres_DataTypes/Array_Spec.ts
  26. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Postgres_DataTypes/Binary_Spec.ts
  27. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Postgres_DataTypes/BooleanEnum_Spec.ts
  28. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Postgres_DataTypes/Character_Spec.ts
  29. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Postgres_DataTypes/DateTime_Spec.ts
  30. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Postgres_DataTypes/Json_Spec.ts
  31. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Postgres_DataTypes/Numeric_Spec.ts
  32. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Postgres_DataTypes/UUID_Spec.ts
  33. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/QueryPane/Mongo1_spec.ts
  34. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/QueryPane/QueryPane_Postgres_Spec.js
List of identified flaky tests.
Thu, 09 Jan 2025 06:41:08 UTC

Communication

Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change?

  • Yes
  • No

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Enhanced evaluation and linting processes with support for consolidated action data payloads
    • Improved dynamic updating of evaluation trees based on action data
  • Chores

    • Updated type definitions to support new data payload consolidation
    • Added ESLint rule disabling for specific type handling
  • Technical Improvements

    • Expanded functionality for handling complex action updates during tree evaluation

@vsvamsi1 vsvamsi1 self-assigned this Jan 9, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 9, 2025

Walkthrough

This pull request introduces an optional actionDataPayloadConsolidated parameter across multiple files in the evaluation system. The changes primarily focus on enhancing the data handling capabilities during tree evaluation and linting processes. The modification allows for more flexible consolidation of action data payloads, enabling more comprehensive processing of actions during evaluation workflows.

Changes

File Change Summary
app/client/src/sagas/EvaluationsSaga.ts Added optional actionDataPayloadConsolidated parameter to evaluateTreeSaga and evalAndLintingHandler functions
app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/types.ts Added actionDataPayloadConsolidated: any to EvalTreeRequestData interface
app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/handlers/evalTree.ts Updated evalTree function to handle consolidated action data payloads
app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/dataStore/utils.ts Added ESLint rule disable for any type usage

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

bug

Suggested reviewers

  • nidhi-nair
  • abhvsn

Poem

🌟 Code flows like a river's might,
Payloads dancing, data taking flight
Sagas weave their magic spell
Evaluation's story we'll tell! 🚀
Consolidated actions, clear and bright 💡

Finishing Touches

  • 📝 Generate Docstrings

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@vsvamsi1 vsvamsi1 added the ok-to-test Required label for CI label Jan 9, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
app/client/src/sagas/EvaluationsSaga.ts (1)

251-251: Consider adding JSDoc for the new parameter.

Document the purpose and expected structure of actionDataPayloadConsolidated.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5978a96 and ac60150.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • app/client/src/sagas/EvaluationsSaga.ts (6 hunks)
  • app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/dataStore/utils.ts (1 hunks)
  • app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/handlers/evalTree.ts (3 hunks)
  • app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/types.ts (2 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
  • app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/dataStore/utils.ts
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (5)
  • GitHub Check: client-lint / client-lint
  • GitHub Check: client-unit-tests / client-unit-tests
  • GitHub Check: client-check-cyclic-deps / check-cyclic-dependencies
  • GitHub Check: client-prettier / prettier-check
  • GitHub Check: client-build / client-build
🔇 Additional comments (2)
app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/handlers/evalTree.ts (1)

196-215: LGTM! Well-structured action data handling.

The implementation correctly:

  1. Handles data path references
  2. Updates evaluation tree and context
  3. Manages data store updates
app/client/src/sagas/EvaluationsSaga.ts (1)

845-857: Verify the order of operations in buffered action handling.

The new condition handles both debounced updates and buffered actions together. Ensure this doesn't affect the evaluation order or cause race conditions.

✅ Verification successful

The order of operations in buffered action handling is properly implemented and safe.

The implementation uses a buffer queue system with proper guards and debouncing mechanisms to prevent race conditions. The test suite confirms correct handling of various scenarios including action clubbing and concurrent updates.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for other places where buffered actions are handled
rg -A 5 "BUFFERED_ACTION" --type ts

Length of output: 9180

@@ -51,6 +52,7 @@ export interface EvalTreeRequestData {
widgetsMeta: Record<string, any>;
shouldRespondWithLogs?: boolean;
affectedJSObjects: AffectedJSObjects;
actionDataPayloadConsolidated: any;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Define a proper type for actionDataPayloadConsolidated.

Using any type reduces type safety. Consider defining a proper interface or type for the consolidated action data payload.

-  actionDataPayloadConsolidated: any;
+  actionDataPayloadConsolidated?: {
+    dataPath: string;
+    dataPathRef?: string;
+    entityName: string;
+    data: unknown;
+  }[];
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
actionDataPayloadConsolidated: any;
actionDataPayloadConsolidated?: {
dataPath: string;
dataPathRef?: string;
entityName: string;
data: unknown;
}[];

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/types.ts (1)

55-55: Consider defining a more specific type for actionDataPayloadConsolidated.

Using any reduces type safety. Consider creating a dedicated type or interface that accurately represents the structure of the consolidated action data payload.

app/client/src/sagas/EvaluationsSaga.ts (1)

251-251: Consider adding JSDoc for the new parameter.

Add documentation for the actionDataPayloadConsolidated parameter to improve code maintainability.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5978a96 and ac60150.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • app/client/src/sagas/EvaluationsSaga.ts (6 hunks)
  • app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/dataStore/utils.ts (1 hunks)
  • app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/handlers/evalTree.ts (3 hunks)
  • app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/types.ts (2 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
  • app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/dataStore/utils.ts
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (3)
  • GitHub Check: client-lint / client-lint
  • GitHub Check: client-unit-tests / client-unit-tests
  • GitHub Check: client-build / client-build
🔇 Additional comments (2)
app/client/src/workers/Evaluation/handlers/evalTree.ts (1)

196-215: Verify data consistency across updates.

The code updates multiple data stores (tree, context, and DataStore) with the same data. Ensure that:

  1. The order of updates is correct to maintain consistency
  2. Error handling is in place for failed updates
  3. The datastore path construction is safe from injection

Consider extracting this logic into a separate function for better maintainability and reusability.

app/client/src/sagas/EvaluationsSaga.ts (1)

845-857: Review the order of operations in buffered action handling.

The new condition block handles both debounced updates and buffered actions together. Ensure that:

  1. The order of operations is correct
  2. No race conditions exist between updates
  3. Error handling is consistent with other code paths

@vsvamsi1 vsvamsi1 added ok-to-test Required label for CI and removed ok-to-test Required label for CI labels Jan 9, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ok-to-test Required label for CI
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant