-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
feat: [#280] Optimize migrate:refresh command #703
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 8000 a> to your account
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve the removal of the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #703 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 69.61% 69.88% +0.27%
==========================================
Files 193 192 -1
Lines 15030 14929 -101
==========================================
- Hits 10463 10433 -30
+ Misses 3984 3933 -51
+ Partials 583 563 -20 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
database/console/migration/migrate_refresh_command.go (1)
Line range hint 68-89
: Improve success message accuracy
The success message is shown even if the seeding operation fails. The success message should only be displayed after all operations complete successfully.
Consider restructuring the code:
if err := r.artisan.Call("migrate"); err != nil {
ctx.Error(errors.MigrationRefreshFailed.Args(err).Error())
- return nil
+ return err
}
if ctx.OptionBool("seed") {
seeders := ctx.OptionSlice("seeder")
seederFlag := ""
if len(seeders) > 0 {
seederFlag = " --seeder " + strings.Join(seeders, ",")
}
if err := r.artisan.Call("db:seed" + seederFlag); err != nil {
ctx.Error(errors.MigrationRefreshFailed.Args(err).Error())
- return nil
+ return err
}
}
ctx.Success("Migration refresh success")
return nil
database/console/migration/migrate_refresh_command_test.go (1)
23-74
: Comprehensive test coverage with well-structured test cases
The table-driven test approach is excellent, with good coverage of both error and success scenarios. Consider adding these edge cases:
- Test with very large step values
- Test with negative step values
- Test with empty seeder array when seed is true
Example test case for negative step:
{
name: "negative step value",
setup: func() {
mockContext.EXPECT().OptionInt("step").Return(-1).Once()
// Expect appropriate error handling
mockContext.EXPECT().Error(errors.InvalidStepValue.Error()).Once()
},
},
database/service_provider.go (1)
99-101
: Document the rationale for different command constructor patterns.
I notice that migration commands follow different patterns:
- Some take
migrator
(e.g.,MigrateCommand
,MigrateRollbackCommand
) - Some take only
artisan
(e.g.,MigrateRefreshCommand
,MigrateFreshCommand
) - Some take both (e.g.,
MigrateFreshCommand
takes bothartisan
andmigrator
)
Consider adding documentation to explain these different patterns and their rationale.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
- database/console/migration/migrate.go (0 hunks)
- database/console/migration/migrate_refresh_command.go (4 hunks)
- database/console/migration/migrate_refresh_command_test.go (1 hunks)
- database/service_provider.go (1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- database/console/migration/migrate.go
🔇 Additional comments (6)
database/console/migration/migrate_refresh_command.go (2)
16-20
: LGTM: Constructor simplification improves design
The removal of the config dependency reduces coupling and follows good dependency injection practices. The command now only depends on what it actually needs - the artisan interface.
37-41
: LGTM: Improved type safety with IntFlag
The change from StringFlag to IntFlag for the step parameter is a good improvement that:
- Provides better type safety
- Eliminates potential string parsing errors
- Makes the code intention clearer
database/console/migration/migrate_refresh_command_test.go (3)
8-9
: LGTM: Clean import organization
The addition of the errors package and mock console imports is well-structured and necessary for the enhanced error handling in the tests.
13-21
: Well-structured test setup with beforeEach pattern
Good use of the beforeEach pattern to initialize mocks, which:
- Reduces code duplication
- Ensures consistent mock initialization
- Makes the test more maintainable
1-83
: Verify performance impact of the optimization
While the test structure is excellent, we should verify that the actual command optimization goal is achieved.
database/service_provider.go (1)
99-99
: Verify configuration access in MigrateRefreshCommand.
The constructor signature has been simplified to only take the artisan
parameter, similar to MigrateFreshCommand
. Let's verify that the command can still access necessary configuration.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the results, I can now generate the final response:
Configuration access has been properly refactored in MigrateRefreshCommand
The command no longer needs direct config access as it delegates the actual migration operations to other commands through the artisan interface:
- Uses
artisan.Call("migrate:reset")
for resetting migrations - Uses
artisan.Call("migrate")
for running migrations - The step option is handled directly through the context parameter
This refactoring aligns with the command's responsibility of orchestrating the refresh operation while letting the underlying commands handle the configuration-dependent tasks.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify how MigrateRefreshCommand accesses configuration after removal of config parameter
# Test: Check if MigrateRefreshCommand uses application.MakeConfig() internally
ast-grep --pattern 'func (cmd *MigrateRefreshCommand) Handle() error {
$$$
MakeConfig()
$$$
}'
# Test: Check for any direct config access patterns
rg -A 5 "MigrateRefreshCommand"
Length of output: 4233
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
GREAT!!
📑 Description
Summary by CodeRabbit
✅ Checks