Skip to content

Conversation

@haohuaijin
Copy link
Collaborator

@haohuaijin haohuaijin commented Sep 11, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes
    • Improved the logic for backward compatibility checks in the Locker implementation, enhancing the accuracy of data interpretation during purge operations.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the ☢️ Bug Something isn't working label Sep 11, 2024
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 11, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the logic within the Locker implementation in the src/infra/src/db/nats.rs file. It changes the condition that checks for backward compatibility concerning the number of parts in ret_parts. The condition now references the second part of ret_parts instead of the third part, which may influence how the system processes the data structure and affects the purge operation based on node_ids.

Changes

Files Change Summary
src/infra/src/db/nats.rs Modified the backward compatibility check in the Locker implementation regarding ret_parts.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant A as Client
    participant B as Locker
    participant C as Database

    A->>B: Request to purge data
    B->>C: Check compatibility with ret_parts
    C-->>B: Return compatibility status
    B-->>A: Purge operation result
Loading

Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 69ae2c4 and fe2147e.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/infra/src/db/nats.rs (1 hunks)
Additional context used
Path-based instructions (1)
src/infra/src/db/nats.rs (1)

Pattern **/*.rs: You are a smart rustlang pull request reviewer.
You are going to review all the rustlang files.
Be concise, and add a brief explanation to your suggestions

Make sure the responses are not too verbose and keep the suggestions to the point i.e. actionable.

Additional comments not posted (1)
src/infra/src/db/nats.rs (1)

750-750: Verify the modification in the backward compatibility condition.

The condition that checks for backward compatibility has been modified to reference the second part of ret_parts instead of the third part.

- && node_ids.is_some_and(|node_ids| !node_ids.contains(ret_parts[2])))
+ && node_ids.is_some_and(|node_ids| !node_ids.contains(ret_parts[1])))

Please verify if this change is intentional and aligns with the expected behavior. Ensure that the modification does not introduce any unintended consequences in the purge operation based on node_ids.


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>.
    • 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 generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @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 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.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

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.

@hengfeiyang hengfeiyang merged commit a62bfb5 into openobserve:main Sep 11, 2024
@haohuaijin haohuaijin deleted the fix_nats_lock branch September 12, 2024 03:51
@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot mentioned this pull request Sep 21, 2024
This was referenced Dec 5, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

☢️ Bug Something isn't working

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants