feat: ICS v6 + new metrics #83
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve a comprehensive update to the consumer identification system across multiple files. The Changes
Possibly related PRs
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 ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #83 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 65 65
Lines 2718 2736 +18
=========================================
+ Hits 2718 2736 +18 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 9
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (17)
assets/consumer-info.json (1)
12-13: LGTM! Consider using a numeric type forconsumer_id.The addition of
consumer_idandphaseproperties enhances the metadata for the chain configuration. This change aligns with the PR objective of implementing "ICS v6 + new metrics".Consider changing the
consumer_idvalue from a string"0"to a numeric0:- "consumer_id": "0", + "consumer_id": 0, "phase": "CONSUMER_PHASE_LAUNCHED"This would be more appropriate if
consumer_idis intended to be used as a numeric identifier.pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign_test.go (1)
26-43: LGTM: Well-structured new test case.This new test function
TestConsumerNeedsToSignGeneratorNoConsumerInfois a valuable addition. It covers an important edge case where validator consumer data exists but consumer info is missing. The test is well-structured, follows the AAA pattern, and is correctly marked as parallel.Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose of this test case for better readability:
// TestConsumerNeedsToSignGeneratorNoConsumerInfo verifies that the generator // returns empty results when validator consumer data exists but consumer info is missing. func TestConsumerNeedsToSignGeneratorNoConsumerInfo(t *testing.T) { // ... (rest of the function) }pkg/fetchers/consumer_commission.go (1)
90-90: Consider adding a comment explaining the use of ConsumerID.To improve code clarity and maintainability, consider adding a brief comment explaining why
ConsumerIDis used instead ofChainID. This will help future developers understand the reasoning behind this choice.Here's a suggested comment to add above the line:
+ // Use ConsumerID instead of ChainID as per ICS v6 specifications commission, queryInfo, err := rpc.GetConsumerCommission(ctx, validator.ConsensusAddress, chain.ConsumerID)pkg/fetchers/has_to_validate.go (1)
Line range hint
1-117: Consider adding comments for better documentation.The code is well-structured and follows Go conventions. To further improve its readability and maintainability, consider adding comments to explain the purpose of the
ValidatorConsumersFetcherstruct and its methods. This would be particularly helpful for new contributors or for future maintenance.Here's an example of how you could add comments:
// ValidatorConsumersFetcher is responsible for fetching and processing validator consumer data. type ValidatorConsumersFetcher struct { // ... (existing fields) } // Fetch retrieves validator consumer data for all configured chains. // It returns the fetched data and query information. func (q *ValidatorConsumersFetcher) Fetch(ctx context.Context) (interface{}, []*types.QueryInfo) { // ... (existing implementation) } // processChain handles the fetching and processing of validator consumer data for a single chain. func (q *ValidatorConsumersFetcher) processChain(ctx context.Context, chainName string, rpc *tendermint.RPC, validator config.Validator) { // ... (existing implementation) }pkg/types/tendermint.go (1)
Line range hint
183-198: Summary of changes and potential impactThe modifications to
ConsumerChainInfoandValidatorConsumerChainsstructs enhance the data structures for consumer chain management. These changes introduce new fields (ConsumerID,AllowInactiveVals,Phase) and rename existing ones (ConsumerChainIdstoConsumerIds) to improve consistency and provide more detailed information.While these changes align with the PR objectives and improve the overall design, they may require updates in other parts of the codebase that interact with these structs. Please ensure that all related code is updated accordingly to maintain consistency and prevent potential issues.
Consider the following recommendations:
- Update any documentation related to these structs to reflect the new fields and their purposes.
- Review and update any serialization/deserialization logic that might be affected by these changes.
- Ensure that any database schemas or API contracts relying on these structs are updated if necessary.
- Update unit tests and integration tests to cover the new fields and renamed field.
pkg/fetchers/consumer_validators_test.go (4)
62-63: LGTM! Consider using a constant for ConsumerID.The update from
ChainIDtoConsumerIDis consistent with the changes mentioned in the summary. This change likely reflects an update in the actual implementation of theConsumerChainstructure.Consider defining a constant for the ConsumerID value "0" at the package level, as it's used consistently across multiple test cases. This would improve maintainability and make it easier to update if needed in the future.
const testConsumerID = "0" // Then use it in the test cases: ConsumerID: testConsumerID,
99-99: LGTM! Consider using string interpolation for the URL.The changes are consistent with the updates to the
ConsumerChainstructure and the newConsumerIDfield. The URL endpoint has been correctly updated to include the ConsumerID.Consider using string interpolation for constructing the URL to make it more dynamic and easier to maintain:
baseURL := "https://api.cosmos.quokkastake.io" endpoint := fmt.Sprintf("%s/interchain_security/ccv/provider/consumer_validators/%s", baseURL, testConsumerID) httpmock.RegisterResponder( "GET", endpoint, httpmock.NewErrorResponder(errors.New("error")), )This approach would make it easier to update the URL structure if needed in the future and would be consistent with the suggested constant for ConsumerID.
Also applies to: 110-111
191-191: LGTM! Consider refactoring common test setup.The changes in this test function are consistent with the updates made in the previous test cases. The URL endpoint and
ConsumerChainstructure have been correctly updated.To reduce code duplication and improve maintainability, consider refactoring the common test setup into a helper function. This could include:
- Creating the
chainsandrpcsvariables- Initializing the
ConsumerValidatorsFetcher- Setting up the httpmock responder
Example:
func setupConsumerValidatorsFetcherTest(t *testing.T, responder httpmock.Responder) *ConsumerValidatorsFetcher { httpmock.Activate() t.Cleanup(httpmock.DeactivateAndReset) baseURL := "https://api.cosmos.quokkastake.io" endpoint := fmt.Sprintf("%s/interchain_security/ccv/provider/consumer_validators/%s", baseURL, testConsumerID) httpmock.RegisterResponder("GET", endpoint, responder) chains := []*config.Chain{{ Name: "chain", LCDEndpoint: baseURL, BechWalletPrefix: "cosmos", Validators: []config.Validator{{Address: "cosmosvaloper1xqz9pemz5e5zycaa89kys5aw6m8rhgsvw4328e"}}, ConsumerChains: []*config.ConsumerChain{{ Name: "consumer", ConsumerID: testConsumerID, }}, }} rpcs := map[string]*tendermint.RPCWithConsumers{ "chain": tendermint.RPCWithConsumersFromChain( chains[0], 10, *logger.GetNopLogger(), tracing.InitNoopTracer(), ), } return &ConsumerValidatorsFetcher{ Logger: *logger.GetNopLogger(), Chains: chains, RPCs: rpcs, Tracer: tracing.InitNoopTracer(), } }This refactoring would significantly reduce duplication across test cases and make it easier to maintain and update the tests in the future.
Also applies to: 202-203
Line range hint
1-230: Overall assessment: Good changes, with room for improvementThe changes made to this file are consistent and correctly implement the transition from
ChainIDtoConsumerIDin theConsumerChainstructure. The URL endpoints have been updated accordingly in all test cases.To further improve the code quality and maintainability, consider implementing the following recommendations:
- Define a constant for the
ConsumerIDvalue "0" at the package level.- Use string interpolation for constructing URLs in the test cases.
- Refactor common test setup code into a helper function to reduce duplication across test cases.
These changes will make the tests more robust, easier to maintain, and less prone to errors when future updates are needed.
pkg/fetchers/consumer_info_test.go (2)
124-125: LGTM with a minor suggestion.The changes to the URL endpoint and error message look good. The URL update is consistent with other test functions, and the error message change doesn't affect the test's functionality.
Consider using a constant for the base URL "https://api.cosmos.quokkastake.io" to improve maintainability across all test functions.
Line range hint
1-247: Overall changes look good. Please clarify the API change.The modifications to the test functions are consistent and well-implemented. The primary change involves updating the URL endpoints to include a trailing
/0.Could you please provide some context on why the API endpoint structure was changed to include
/0at the end? Understanding the reasoning behind this change would be helpful for future maintenance and potential impacts on the system architecture.pkg/fetchers/consumer_commission_test.go (1)
63-64: LGTM! Consider adding a comment for clarity.The change from ChainID to ConsumerID is consistent with the new identifier format.
Consider adding a brief comment explaining the significance of "0" as the ConsumerID, especially if this value has a specific meaning in the context of consumer chains.
pkg/fetchers/signing_info_test.go (2)
324-324: LGTM! Consider using a constant for the consumer ID.The URL structure update improves the RESTful design by using a path parameter instead of a query parameter. This is a good change.
Consider defining a constant for the consumer ID "0" to improve maintainability and reduce magic numbers in the code. For example:
const defaultConsumerID = "0"Then use it in the URL:
fmt.Sprintf("https://api.cosmos.quokkastake.io/interchain_security/ccv/provider/validator_consumer_addr/%s/cosmosvalcons1rt4g447zhv6jcqwdl447y88guwm0eevnrelgzc", defaultConsumerID)
340-340: LGTM! Consider using a variable for ConsumerID.The change from
ChainIDtoConsumerIDaligns well with the updated URL structure. This improves consistency in the codebase.To improve maintainability and flexibility, consider using a variable for the ConsumerID instead of a hardcoded value. This would allow for easier testing with different consumer IDs. For example:
consumerID := "0" // ... later in the code ConsumerID: consumerID,This approach would make it easier to modify the consumer ID for different test scenarios if needed in the future.
pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign.go (1)
37-39: Update metric help text to accurately describe its purposeThe current help text
"Top-N percent threshold for consumer chains."may not clearly describe what theconsumer_needs_to_signmetric represents. Consider updating the help text to provide a more accurate and descriptive explanation.Apply this diff to improve the help text:
Name: constants.MetricsPrefix + "consumer_needs_to_sign", - Help: "Top-N percent threshold for consumer chains.", + Help: "Indicates whether a validator needs to sign on a consumer chain.",pkg/generators/consumer_info_test.go (1)
62-71: Consider using variables for label values to enhance maintainabilityCurrently, label values are hard-coded strings. Using variables derived from the test data can prevent discrepancies and make the test easier to maintain.
For example, refactor the labels as follows:
assert.InEpsilon(t, float64(1), testutil.ToFloat64(consumerInfoGauge.With(prometheus.Labels{ - "chain_id": "chain-id", - "consumer_id": "0", + "chain_id": consumerInfo.ChainID, + "consumer_id": consumerInfo.ConsumerID, "provider": "provider", - "phase": "CONSUMER_PHASE_LAUNCHED", - "allow_inactive_vals": "0", + "phase": consumerInfo.Phase, + "allow_inactive_vals": strconv.FormatBool(consumerInfo.AllowInactiveVals), })), 0.01)pkg/generators/consumer_info.go (1)
72-79: Simplify boolean to string conversion inallow_inactive_valslabel.Instead of converting the boolean to a float64 and then formatting it, consider directly converting the boolean to a string.
Apply this diff to simplify the code:
-"allow_inactive_vals": fmt.Sprintf("%.0f", utils.BoolToFloat64(consumerInfo.AllowInactiveVals)), +"allow_inactive_vals": strconv.FormatBool(consumerInfo.AllowInactiveVals),If you prefer to represent the boolean as
"1"or"0", you can use:+"allow_inactive_vals": strconv.FormatInt(utils.BoolToInt64(consumerInfo.AllowInactiveVals), 10),Ensure that
utils.BoolToInt64returns anint64.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (21)
- assets/config-valid.toml (1 hunks)
- assets/consumer-info.json (1 hunks)
- assets/validator-consumers.json (1 hunks)
- config.example.toml (1 hunks)
- pkg/config/consumer_chain.go (2 hunks)
- pkg/config/consumer_chain_test.go (3 hunks)
- pkg/fetchers/consumer_commission.go (1 hunks)
- pkg/fetchers/consumer_commission_test.go (8 hunks)
- pkg/fetchers/consumer_info.go (2 hunks)
- pkg/fetchers/consumer_info_test.go (3 hunks)
- pkg/fetchers/consumer_validators.go (1 hunks)
- pkg/fetchers/consumer_validators_test.go (7 hunks)
- pkg/fetchers/has_to_validate.go (1 hunks)
- pkg/fetchers/signing_info.go (1 hunks)
- pkg/fetchers/signing_info_test.go (11 hunks)
- pkg/generators/consumer_info.go (3 hunks)
- pkg/generators/consumer_info_test.go (2 hunks)
- pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign.go (2 hunks)
- pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign_test.go (4 hunks)
- pkg/tendermint/rpc.go (7 hunks)
- pkg/types/tendermint.go (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (2)
pkg/config/consumer_chain_test.go (1)
Learnt from: freak12techno PR: QuokkaStake/cosmos-validators-exporter#64 File: pkg/config/consumer_chain_test.go:63-63 Timestamp: 2024-06-25T21:31:42.607Z Learning: In `pkg/config/consumer_chain_test.go`, incomplete `DenomInfos` fields are intentionally set to trigger validation failures as part of testing error handling.pkg/fetchers/consumer_validators_test.go (1)
Learnt from: freak12techno PR: QuokkaStake/cosmos-validators-exporter#63 File: pkg/fetchers/consumer_validators.go:40-40 Timestamp: 2024-06-23T16:11:23.143Z Learning: The `TestConsumerValidatorsFetcherBase` method in `pkg/fetchers/consumer_validators_test.go` tests the initialization of `ConsumerValidatorsFetcher` with the `Chains` parameter.
🔇 Additional comments not posted (41)
pkg/config/consumer_chain_test.go (4)
51-51: LGTM: ConsumerID added to test caseThe change from
ChainIDtoConsumerIDin theConsumerChainstruct initialization is correct. This update ensures that the test case properly validates the behavior whenBaseDenomis missing butConsumerIDis present, aligning with the updated struct definition.
62-62: LGTM: ConsumerID added and invalid Denoms test maintainedThe addition of
ConsumerID: "0"is correct and consistent with the struct update. This test case continues to focus on validating invalidDenoms.Note: The empty
DenomInfosis intentionally set to trigger a validation failure, which is the correct approach for testing error handling in this scenario.
76-76: LGTM: ConsumerID added to valid configuration testThe addition of
ConsumerID: "0"to the validConsumerChainconfiguration test is correct. This change ensures that the test case properly validates a fully populated and validConsumerChainstruct, including the newConsumerIDfield. The test continues to expect no error, which is appropriate for a valid configuration.
Line range hint
51-76: Summary: Consistent update from ChainID to ConsumerIDThe changes in this file consistently replace
ChainIDwithConsumerIDacross all relevant test cases. This update appears to be part of a larger refactoring effort to useConsumerIDinstead ofChainIDin theConsumerChainstruct.The modifications maintain the original test logic and assertions while properly validating the new
ConsumerIDfield. This ensures that the test suite continues to provide adequate coverage for the updatedConsumerChainstruct.Overall, these changes are well-implemented and maintain the integrity of the test suite.
pkg/config/consumer_chain.go (1)
41-42: LGTM: Validation logic correctly updated for ConsumerID.The validation logic has been properly updated to check for the presence of
ConsumerIDinstead ofChainID. The error message is clear and consistent with the new field name.pkg/fetchers/consumer_validators.go (1)
78-78: LGTM. Verify consistency of ConsumerID usage.The change from
chain.ChainIDtochain.ConsumerIDlooks good and aligns with the expected behavior for consumer chains. This update likely reflects a shift in how consumer chains are identified in the system.To ensure consistency across the codebase, please run the following verification script:
This script will help ensure that:
- There are no remaining uses of
ChainIDin the context of consumer chains.ConsumerIDis being used consistently for consumer chains.- The
ConsumerIDfield exists in the relevant structs.Please review the results and make any necessary adjustments to maintain consistency across the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
Verification Successful: ConsumerID usage is consistent
The change from
chain.ChainIDtochain.ConsumerIDhas been successfully verified. No remaining usages ofChainIDwere found in the consumer chain context, andConsumerIDis used consistently across the codebase. Additionally, theConsumerIDfield exists in the relevant structs.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of ConsumerID and ChainID for consumer chains # Test 1: Check for any remaining uses of ChainID in the context of consumer chains echo "Checking for ChainID usage in consumer chain context:" rg --type go 'chain\.ChainID.*consumer' # Test 2: Verify that ConsumerID is being used consistently for consumer chains echo "Verifying ConsumerID usage for consumer chains:" rg --type go 'chain\.ConsumerID' # Test 3: Check if the ConsumerID field exists in the relevant structs echo "Checking for ConsumerID field in structs:" ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'type $_ struct { $$$ ConsumerID $_ $$$ }'Length of output: 2207
pkg/fetchers/consumer_info.go (2)
91-91: LGTM: Improved error message accuracyThe updated error message "Error querying consumer info" is more accurate and consistent with the
GetConsumerInfomethod. This change enhances code readability and maintainability.
102-102: Verify consistency of ConsumerID usageThe change from
consumerInfo.ChainIDtoconsumerInfo.ConsumerIDas the key for storing consumer information is noted. This change likely provides a more specific identifier for consumer chains.Please ensure that this change is consistent with the
ConsumerChainInfostruct definition and that all other parts of the codebase that access this data have been updated accordingly.Let's verify the consistency of this change:
✅ Verification successful
Verified ConsumerID usage consistency
The change from
consumerInfo.ChainIDtoconsumerInfo.ConsumerIDas the key for storing consumer information is consistently applied across the codebase. No remaining references toChainIDare found in the context of consumer information.
- All assignments to the
allInfosmap useConsumerID:
pkg/fetchers/consumer_info.goConsumerIDis properly defined and utilized in related structs and configurations:
pkg/types/tendermint.gopkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign_test.gopkg/config/consumer_chain.go🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining uses of ChainID in relation to consumer info # Test 1: Search for ConsumerChainInfo struct definition echo "ConsumerChainInfo struct definition:" rg --type go "type ConsumerChainInfo struct" -A 10 # Test 2: Search for uses of ChainID in relation to consumer info echo "\nUses of ChainID in relation to consumer info:" rg --type go "ConsumerChainInfo.*ChainID" # Test 3: Search for uses of ConsumerID in relation to consumer info echo "\nUses of ConsumerID in relation to consumer info:" rg --type go "ConsumerChainInfo.*ConsumerID"Length of output: 1112
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Comprehensive search for ChainID and ConsumerID usages related to consumer info echo "Searching for any usage of ChainID related to consumer information:" rg --type go 'ChainID' --context 'consumer' echo "\nSearching for any usage of ConsumerID related to consumer information:" rg --type go 'ConsumerID' --context 'consumer' echo "\nSearching for assignments to allInfos map with ConsumerID as key:" rg --type go 'allInfos\[[^\]]*\]\[ConsumerID\]' echo "\nSearching for assignments to allInfos map with ChainID as key:" rg --type go 'allInfos\[[^\]]*\]\[ChainID\]'Length of output: 917
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Comprehensive search for ChainID and ConsumerID usages related to consumer info echo "Searching for any usage of ChainID related to consumer information:" rg --type go 'ChainID.*consumer' echo "\nSearching for any usage of ConsumerID related to consumer information:" rg --type go 'ConsumerID.*consumer' echo "\nSearching for assignments to allInfos map with ConsumerID as key:" rg --type go 'allInfos\[[^\]]*\]\[ConsumerID\]' echo "\nSearching for assignments to allInfos map with ChainID as key:" rg --type go 'allInfos\[[^\]]*\]\[ChainID\]'Length of output: 1081
pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign_test.go (3)
8-8: LGTM: New import added.The addition of the "main/pkg/types" import is appropriate, likely to support the changes in the test functions.
Line range hint
1-87: Summary: Good improvements to test coverage with a point for clarification.Overall, the changes to this test file are positive:
- A new test case has been added to cover an important edge scenario.
- Existing tests have been updated to reflect changes in data structures and naming conventions.
- The tests remain well-structured and follow good practices like parallel execution.
The main point for clarification is the change in the number of expected metrics in the
TestConsumerNeedsToSignGeneratorNotEmptyStatetest. Once this is addressed, the changes look ready for approval.
53-55: LGTM with a question: Changes to TestConsumerNeedsToSignGeneratorNotEmptyState.The modifications to this test function look good overall:
- The consumer ID change from "consumer-chain-id" to "consumer-id" is consistent throughout the test.
- The addition of the ConsumerInfoData structure provides more context and aligns with the new data structure.
- The label changes in the assertion correctly reflect the new consumer ID naming.
However, I noticed that the expected number of metrics has changed from 2 to 1:
assert.Equal(t, 1, testutil.CollectAndCount(gauge))Could you please clarify why we now expect only one metric instead of two? This change might indicate a significant modification in the generator's behavior. To verify this change, let's run the following script:
This script will help us understand if there have been changes in the generator implementation that justify the reduction in the number of expected metrics.
Also applies to: 59-66, 80-84
✅ Verification successful
To further investigate the reduction in the expected number of metrics, let's run a script to identify all metric definitions related to
ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator.
To further investigate the reduction in the expected number of metrics, let's run a script to identify all metric definitions related to
ConsumerNeedsToSignGeneratoracross the entire codebase.
Verification Complete: Metric Reduction is Justified.
The reduction in the expected number of metrics from 2 to 1 in
TestConsumerNeedsToSignGeneratorNotEmptyStatealigns with the current implementation ofConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator, which initializes only theneedsToSignGaugemetric. No additional metrics were removed or altered, confirming that the test changes are appropriate.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for changes in the ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator that might affect the number of metrics generated. # Search for the ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator implementation echo "ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator implementation:" rg --type go -A 10 "type ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator struct" # Search for changes in the Generate method echo "\nGenerate method of ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator:" rg --type go -A 20 "func \(g \*ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator\) Generate"Length of output: 2802
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Identify all metric definitions related to ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator. # Search for metric initializations in ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator echo "Metric initializations in ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator:" rg --type go "prometheus\.NewGaugeVec" pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign.go # Search for any removed metrics by checking git history for deletions related to metrics in the generator echo "\nDeleted metric definitions in ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator:" git log -p -S "prometheus.NewGaugeVec" -- pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign.go | grep -E '^-.*prometheus\.NewGaugeVec'Length of output: 503
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Identify all Prometheus metric definitions related to ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator across the codebase. # Search for all Prometheus metric initializations in files related to ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator echo "Prometheus metric initializations related to ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator:" rg --type go "prometheus\.(NewGaugeVec|NewCounterVec|NewHistogramVec)" -- "pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign.go" "pkg/generators/" # Additionally, search for any other metric types that might be associated echo "\nOther metric initializations related to ConsumerNeedsToSignGenerator:" rg --type go "prometheus\." -- "pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign.go" "pkg/generators/"Length of output: 27731
pkg/fetchers/consumer_commission.go (1)
90-90: LGTM. Verify impact on other parts of the codebase.The change from
chain.ChainIDtochain.ConsumerIDlooks correct and aligns with the PR objectives. This update likely reflects changes in the underlying API or data model for ICS v6.To ensure this change doesn't introduce inconsistencies, please run the following script to check for any remaining uses of
ChainIDin the context of consumer commission:✅ Verification successful
Verified: No remaining uses of
ChainIDfound in the consumer commission context.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for remaining uses of ChainID in consumer commission context # Search for ChainID usage in consumer commission related code rg --type go "ChainID.*GetConsumerCommission" . rg --type go "ConsumerCommission.*ChainID" .Length of output: 96
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining uses of ChainID in consumer commission context # Search for 'ChainID' used with 'GetConsumerCommission' in Go files rg --type go 'ChainID\s*,\s*GetConsumerCommission' . # Search for 'ConsumerCommission' structures or functions that include 'ChainID' rg --type go 'ConsumerCommission.*ChainID' .Length of output: 101
pkg/fetchers/has_to_validate.go (1)
116-117: LGTM! Verify consistency with consumer IDs across the codebase.The change from
ConsumerChainIdstoConsumerIdslooks good and aligns with the method nameGetValidatorConsumerChains. This update maintains the overall structure while potentially providing more precise identification of consumers.To ensure consistency across the codebase, please run the following script:
✅ Verification successful
Verification Successful: All references to ConsumerChainIds have been removed.
No remaining instances of
ConsumerChainIdswere found in the codebase, ensuring consistency with the implemented changes.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for any remaining references to ConsumerChainIds and compare with ConsumerIds usage echo "Checking for ConsumerChainIds usage:" rg --type go "ConsumerChainIds" echo "Checking for ConsumerIds usage:" rg --type go "ConsumerIds" echo "Verify that all relevant parts of the codebase have been updated to use ConsumerIds instead of ConsumerChainIds."Length of output: 610
pkg/fetchers/signing_info.go (1)
155-155: Approve change and verify consistencyThe modification from
chain.ChainIDtochain.ConsumerIDaligns with the PR objective of updating to ICS v6. This change suggests a shift in how consumer chains are identified when fetching assigned keys.To ensure consistency across the codebase:
- Verify that the
GetConsumerAssignedKeymethod in theproviderRPCobject has been updated to acceptConsumerIDinstead ofChainID.- Check for any other occurrences of
GetConsumerAssignedKeyto ensure they've been updated similarly.Run the following script to verify:
Also, please update any relevant documentation or comments that might reference this change in behavior.
✅ Verification successful
Change Verified Successfully
The update from
chain.ChainIDtochain.ConsumerIDin theGetConsumerAssignedKeymethod call is consistent with the method's signature and aligns with the PR objective. No further issues were found in the codebase regarding this change.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistency in GetConsumerAssignedKey usage # Search for GetConsumerAssignedKey method calls echo "Searching for GetConsumerAssignedKey method calls:" rg --type go -A 3 'GetConsumerAssignedKey\(' # Search for the method definition echo "Searching for GetConsumerAssignedKey method definition:" rg --type go -A 5 'func.*GetConsumerAssignedKey\('Length of output: 1099
pkg/types/tendermint.go (1)
197-198: LGTM! Verify usage of renamed field in related code.The renaming of
ConsumerChainIdstoConsumerIdsin theValidatorConsumerChainsstruct maintains consistency with the newly introducedConsumerIDfield inConsumerChainInfo. This change improves the overall coherence of the codebase.To ensure all references are updated, please verify the usage of this renamed field:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for usage of renamed ValidatorConsumerChains field # Search for old field name (should return no results) echo "Checking for any remaining usage of ConsumerChainIds:" rg --type go 'ConsumerChainIds' # Search for new field name echo "Checking usage of new ConsumerIds field:" rg --type go 'ConsumerIds' # Search for ValidatorConsumerChains struct usage echo "Checking ValidatorConsumerChains struct usage:" rg --type go 'ValidatorConsumerChains'This will help identify any areas that might need updates to accommodate the renamed field.
pkg/fetchers/consumer_validators_test.go (1)
145-145: LGTM! Changes are consistent with previous updates.The changes in this test function are consistent with the updates made in the previous test cases. The URL endpoint and
ConsumerChainstructure have been correctly updated.The suggestions made in the previous comments regarding the use of a constant for ConsumerID and string interpolation for URL construction apply here as well. Implementing these suggestions would improve consistency and maintainability across all test cases.
Also applies to: 156-157
pkg/fetchers/consumer_info_test.go (2)
165-165: LGTM!The URL endpoint update is consistent with the changes in other test functions. The rest of the test logic remains unchanged, which is correct.
206-206: LGTM with a suggestion for verification.The URL endpoint update is consistent with the changes in other test functions. The rest of the test logic remains unchanged, which is correct.
Please verify that the test data in the "consumer-info.json" file is still valid and consistent with the updated endpoint structure. Run the following script to check the content of the file:
✅ Verification successful
Verification Successful.
The
consumer_idinconsumer-info.jsonmatches the updated endpoint structure.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the content of the consumer-info.json file # Test: Check if the file exists and display its content cat assets/consumer-info.jsonLength of output: 369
pkg/fetchers/consumer_commission_test.go (5)
107-108: LGTM! Consistent with previous changes.The update to use ConsumerID instead of ChainID is consistent with the changes made in other test cases.
196-196: LGTM! Consistent with previous changes.The updates to the URL path and ConsumerChain structure are consistent with the changes made in other test cases, maintaining uniformity across the test suite.
Also applies to: 210-211
Line range hint
1-300: Overall assessment: Changes are consistent and well-implemented.The modifications to replace ChainID with ConsumerID and update URL paths are consistent throughout the test suite. These changes align with the new identifier format described in the PR objectives. All test cases have been updated accordingly, maintaining the integrity of the test suite.
A few suggestions for minor improvements and verifications have been provided in the individual comments. Please address these to ensure the robustness of the implementation.
248-248: LGTM! Consistent changes across all test cases.The updates to the URL path and ConsumerChain structure are consistent throughout all test cases, ensuring uniformity in the test suite.
To ensure all instances have been updated correctly, please run the following script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all instances of ConsumerID and URL paths have been updated # Test: Check for any remaining instances of ChainID in ConsumerChain structures rg --type go 'ConsumerChain.*ChainID' # Test: Check for any remaining instances of "consumer" in URL paths rg --type go 'consumer_commission_rate/consumer' # Expected result: Both searches should return no results, confirming all instances have been updated.Also applies to: 262-263
144-144: LGTM! Verify URL path construction.The changes are consistent with the new identifier format. The URL path now uses "0" instead of "consumer", which corresponds to the ConsumerID.
To ensure the URL path is constructed correctly in the actual implementation, please run the following script:
Also applies to: 158-159
✅ Verification successful
URL path construction verified.
The
ConsumerCommissionFetchercorrectly uses "0" in the URL path as intended.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the URL path construction in the ConsumerCommissionFetcher # Test: Search for the function that constructs the URL path rg --type go -A 10 'func.*ConsumerCommissionFetcher' # Test: Search for the specific URL path construction rg --type go 'consumer_commission_rate/.*cosmosvalcons'Length of output: 88
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Re-verify the URL path construction in the ConsumerCommissionFetcher with updated patterns # Test: Search for the ConsumerCommissionFetcher function rg --type go -A 10 'func\s+ConsumerCommissionFetcher' # Test: Search for the updated URL path construction with '0' instead of 'consumer' rg --type go 'consumer_commission_rate/0/cosmosvalcons'Length of output: 690
pkg/tendermint/rpc.go (5)
Line range hint
193-205: LGTM: Consistent parameter renamingThe change from
chainIdtoconsumerIDin both the method signature and URL construction is consistent and improves clarity in the context of interchain security.
234-234: Verify the intention behind hardcoded consumer phaseThe URL has been updated to use a hardcoded value "0" for the consumer phase, representing "CONSUMER_PHASE_UNSPECIFIED". Please confirm if this change is intentional and if it adequately covers all use cases for this method.
Could you provide more context on why this change was made? Are there any scenarios where we might need to query for different consumer phases?
Line range hint
367-387: LGTM: Consistent parameter renamingThe change from
chainIDtoconsumerIDin both the method signature and URL construction is consistent and improves clarity in the context of interchain security.
Line range hint
556-568: LGTM: Consistent parameter renamingThe change from
chainIDtoconsumerIDin both the method signature and URL construction is consistent and improves clarity in the context of interchain security.
Line range hint
1-684: Summary: Consistent renaming and potential hardcoding concernThe changes in this file primarily involve renaming
chainIdtoconsumerIDacross multiple methods, which improves clarity in the context of interchain security. These changes are consistent and well-implemented.However, there's one point that requires attention:
- In the
GetConsumerInfomethod, a hardcoded value "0" has been introduced for the consumer phase. This might limit the method's flexibility, and it's worth verifying if this is the intended behavior for all use cases.Overall, the changes look good, but please address the concern about the hardcoded value in
GetConsumerInfo.pkg/fetchers/signing_info_test.go (5)
381-381: LGTM! Consistent URL structure update.This change maintains consistency with the earlier URL structure update, which is good for maintaining a uniform API design across the codebase.
397-397: LGTM! Consider earlier suggestion for ConsumerID.This change is consistent with the earlier update to use ConsumerID instead of ChainID.
As suggested earlier, consider using a variable for the ConsumerID instead of a hardcoded value to improve maintainability and flexibility in testing.
488-488: LGTM! Consistent URL structure updates.These changes maintain consistency with the earlier URL structure updates across multiple test cases. This uniformity is crucial for maintaining a coherent API design and test suite.
Also applies to: 545-545
504-504: LGTM! Consider earlier suggestions for ConsumerID.These changes consistently use ConsumerID across multiple test cases, which is good for maintaining uniformity.
As suggested earlier, consider using a variable or constant for the ConsumerID instead of repeating the hardcoded value "0". This would improve maintainability and make it easier to update or parameterize these tests in the future.
Also applies to: 567-567
612-612: LGTM! Consistent updates throughout the test suite.These final changes maintain consistency with all the earlier updates to URL structure and ConsumerID usage across multiple test cases.
Overall, these changes improve the consistency of the test suite and align it with the updated API design. To further enhance the code:
- Consider using a constant or variable for the ConsumerID value "0".
- Ensure that these changes are reflected in the actual implementation code, not just the tests.
- Update any relevant documentation to reflect the new URL structure and ConsumerID usage.
Also applies to: 634-634, 695-695
pkg/generators/consumer_info_test.go (4)
35-41: Good implementation of theConsumerChainInfostructureThe
ConsumerChainInfodata is correctly initialized with the new fields, reflecting the updated structure in the test setup.
50-51: Accurate configuration ofConsumerChainsThe
ConsumerChainsare properly configured withNameandConsumerID, which aligns with the new test requirements.Also applies to: 53-54
60-60: Verify the expected number of generated metricsThe assertion
assert.Len(t, results, 3)expects three metrics. Ensure that the generator indeed produces three metrics and that this change reflects the intended enhancement.
75-76: Labels intopNGaugeandminPowerGaugeare correctly specifiedThe labels for both gauges accurately reflect the test data, ensuring that the metrics are properly identified.
Also applies to: 82-83
pkg/generators/consumer_info.go (4)
30-42: Addition ofconsumer_infometric is correct.The new gauge
consumer_infois properly initialized with appropriate labels for tracking consumer chain information.
46-54: Metricthreshold_percentrenamed toconsumer_top_nsuccessfully.The metric has been renamed, and labels have been updated to include
consumer_idandprovider, which improves clarity.
Line range hint
57-65: Metricminimal_stakerenamed toconsumer_minimal_stakecorrectly.The updates to the metric name and labels are appropriate.
93-93: Return statement includes all necessary collectors.The
Generatefunction correctly returns the newconsumerInfoGaugealong with the updated gauges.
| {"consumer_ids":["0", "1"]} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Review Findings:
Specific chain identifier references (neutron-1) were found in pkg/app_test.go. Please review and update these references to align with the new consumer_ids scheme if necessary.
🔗 Analysis chain
LGTM! Consider the following points:
The change from consumer_chain_ids to consumer_ids with numeric identifiers aligns well with the PR objective of implementing ICS v6. This modification suggests a more generic and flexible approach to consumer identification.
However, please consider the following:
-
This change may impact how other parts of the system reference these consumer identifiers. Ensure that all affected components are updated accordingly.
-
As this appears to be a breaking change, verify that this modification is properly communicated to users and that appropriate migration steps are provided if necessary.
To ensure consistency across the codebase, please run the following script:
Consider updating any related documentation or README files to reflect this change in consumer identification. This will help maintain clear and up-to-date information for developers and users interacting with the system.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining references to the old 'consumer_chain_ids' and specific chain identifiers.
echo "Checking for old 'consumer_chain_ids' references:"
rg --type-not json 'consumer_chain_ids'
echo "Checking for specific chain identifier references:"
rg --type-not json 'neutron-1|stride-1'
Length of output: 802
| @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ type ConsumerChain struct { | |||
| LCDEndpoint string `toml:"lcd-endpoint"` | |||
| BaseDenom string `toml:"base-denom"` | |||
| Denoms DenomInfos `toml:"denoms"` | |||
| ChainID string `toml:"chain-id"` | |||
| ConsumerID string `toml:"consumer-id"` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider adding a getter method for ConsumerID.
For consistency with other fields like Queries, Host, and Name that have getter methods, consider adding a getter method for ConsumerID. This would provide a uniform interface for accessing the struct's fields.
Here's a suggested implementation:
func (c *ConsumerChain) GetConsumerID() string {
return c.ConsumerID
}This method could be added after the existing getter methods in the file.
💡 Codebase verification
Incomplete Replacement of ChainID with ConsumerID
The addition of the ConsumerID field is approved. However, there are still instances of ChainID present in the codebase that need to be addressed to ensure consistency.
pkg/types/tendermint.gopkg/generators/consumer_info_test.gopkg/generators/consumer_info.go
Please review and update these instances to ConsumerID where appropriate.
🔗 Analysis chain
Approve the addition of ConsumerID field, but verify its usage across the codebase.
The change from ChainID to ConsumerID is a good improvement in terminology for a consumer chain. However, we should ensure that this change is consistently applied throughout the codebase.
Let's verify the usage of ConsumerID and check for any remaining instances of ChainID:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for ConsumerID usage and any remaining ChainID instances
# Search for ConsumerID usage
echo "ConsumerID usage:"
rg --type go "ConsumerID"
# Search for any remaining ChainID instances
echo "\nRemaining ChainID instances:"
rg --type go "ChainID"
Length of output: 2847
| @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ denoms = [ | |||
| [[chains.consumers]] | |||
| name = "neutron" | |||
| lcd-endpoint = "https://api.neutron.quokkastake.io" | |||
| chain-id = "neutron-1" | |||
| consumer-id = "0" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Residual references to chain_id detected
The replacement of chain-id with consumer-id is not fully propagated across the codebase. Specifically, chain_id: "neutron-1" remains in assets/consumer-info.json, which may lead to inconsistencies.
- Update
chain_idreferences inassets/consumer-info.jsonto align with the newconsumer-idusage. - Verify other parts of the codebase for any additional references to
chain-id. - Ensure that related documentation is updated accordingly.
🔗 Analysis chain
Significant change in Neutron chain identification
The replacement of chain-id with consumer-id appears to be a substantial modification in how the Neutron chain is identified within the system. This change raises several points that require attention:
-
Can you please clarify the implications of this change? Specifically:
- How does this affect the system's interaction with the Neutron chain?
- Is this part of a broader update to the ICS (Inter-Chain Standard) mentioned in the PR title?
- What does the value "0" signify for the
consumer-id?
-
It's crucial to ensure that this change is consistently applied across the entire system. Any code or configurations that previously referenced Neutron's
chain-idmay need to be updated. -
The project's documentation should be reviewed and updated to reflect this new identification method for consumer chains.
To ensure consistency, please run the following script to check for any remaining references to Neutron's previous chain-id:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for references to the old Neutron chain-id
rg --type toml --type yaml --type json "neutron-1"
Length of output: 107
| ChainID string `json:"chain_id"` | ||
| ConsumerID string `json:"consumer_id"` | ||
| TopN int `json:"top_n"` | ||
| MinPowerInTopN math.Int `json:"min_power_in_top_N"` | ||
| AllowInactiveVals bool `json:"allow_inactive_vals"` | ||
| Phase string `json:"phase"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Inconsistent Use of ConsumerID and ConsumerIds Fields
The codebase shows both ConsumerID (singular) and ConsumerIds (plural) being used interchangeably. This inconsistency can lead to confusion and potential bugs.
-
Files with
ConsumerIds:pkg/types/tendermint.gopkg/fetchers/has_to_validate.go
-
Files with
ConsumerID:- Multiple files including
pkg/generators,pkg/fetchers, andpkg/config
- Multiple files including
Please standardize the field naming to use either ConsumerID or ConsumerIds consistently across the codebase to ensure clarity and prevent potential issues.
🔗 Analysis chain
LGTM! Verify usage of new fields in related code.
The additions to ConsumerChainInfo struct enhance the information available about consumer chains. The new fields ConsumerID, AllowInactiveVals, and Phase provide valuable data for chain management and validator selection.
To ensure consistency, please verify the usage of these new fields in related code:
This will help identify any areas that might need updates to accommodate these new fields.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for usage of new ConsumerChainInfo fields
# Search for ConsumerID usage
echo "Checking ConsumerID usage:"
rg --type go 'ConsumerID'
# Search for AllowInactiveVals usage
echo "Checking AllowInactiveVals usage:"
rg --type go 'AllowInactiveVals'
# Search for Phase usage
echo "Checking Phase usage:"
rg --type go 'Phase'
# Search for ConsumerChainInfo struct usage
echo "Checking ConsumerChainInfo struct usage:"
rg --type go 'ConsumerChainInfo'
Length of output: 1108
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Further verify usage of new ConsumerChainInfo fields
# Search for AllowInactiveVals usage
echo "Checking AllowInactiveVals usage:"
rg --type go 'AllowInactiveVals'
# Search for Phase usage
echo "Checking Phase usage:"
rg --type go 'Phase'
# Verify if 'ConsumerID' is correctly used instead of 'ConsumerIds'
echo "Checking for 'ConsumerID' vs 'ConsumerIds' usage:"
rg --type go 'ConsumerID'
rg --type go 'ConsumerIds'
Length of output: 3493
| # Consumer chain's consumer-id. Required. | ||
| consumer-id = "0" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Residual 'chain-id' References Detected
The search revealed that chain-id is still referenced in pkg/generators/consumer_info_test.go:
ChainID: "chain-id""chain_id": "chain-id",
Please update these instances to consumer-id to ensure consistency and prevent potential conflicts.
🔗 Analysis chain
Significant change in consumer chain identification
The replacement of chain-id with consumer-id appears to be a notable change in how consumer chains are identified. This modification might be related to the ICS v6 upgrade mentioned in the PR title.
-
Could you please clarify the implications of this change? Specifically:
- How does this affect existing configurations?
- Are there any backward compatibility concerns?
- Is the value "0" a placeholder, or does it have a specific meaning?
-
It's recommended to update any relevant documentation to reflect this change from
chain-idtoconsumer-id. -
Please verify if other parts of the configuration or the application itself need to be updated to accommodate this change. For instance, are there any references to
chain-idelsewhere that should now useconsumer-id?
To help identify any potential issues, you can run the following script to search for other occurrences of chain-id in the codebase:
This will help ensure that all necessary updates have been made consistently across the project.
[/run_scripts]
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for occurrences of 'chain-id' in the codebase
rg --type toml 'chain-id' -C 3
Length of output: 30
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for occurrences of 'chain-id' across all file types in the codebase
rg 'chain-id' -C 3
Length of output: 1122
| for _, consumer := range chain.ConsumerChains { | ||
| _, needsToSign := validatorConsumers[consumer.ChainID] | ||
| for _, consumer := range chainConsumers { | ||
| _, needsToSign := validatorConsumers[consumer.ConsumerID] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Correct the logic for determining if a validator needs to sign
In the current code:
_, needsToSign := validatorConsumers[consumer.ConsumerID]The needsToSign variable will be true if the validator has already signed (i.e., the consumer.ConsumerID exists in validatorConsumers), and false otherwise. This logic is inverted because we want needsToSign to be true when the validator needs to sign.
To fix the logic, invert the boolean value:
- _, needsToSign := validatorConsumers[consumer.ConsumerID]
+ _, hasSigned := validatorConsumers[consumer.ConsumerID]
+ needsToSign := !hasSignedThis ensures that needsToSign is true when the validator has not yet signed, accurately reflecting the intended meaning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
needsToSign is true if the consumer ID is present in this array, this is how it's designed to work
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@freak12techno, thanks for the clarification. I've noted this for future reviews.
(_/)
(•_•)
✏️ Learnings added
Learnt from: freak12techno
PR: QuokkaStake/cosmos-validators-exporter#83
File: pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign.go:65-65
Timestamp: 2024-09-25T12:59:19.503Z
Learning: In `pkg/generators/consumer_needs_to_sign.go`, the `needsToSign` variable is designed to be `true` when the consumer ID is present in `validatorConsumers`, indicating that the validator needs to sign, as per the intended logic.
Note: Learnings are effective only in the context of similar code segments. To apply general coding guidelines, please configure review instructions. You can manage existing learnings in the app.
| "0": types.ConsumerChainInfo{ | ||
| ChainID: "chain-id", | ||
| ConsumerID: "0", | ||
| AllowInactiveVals: false, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ensure consistent representation of boolean values in labels
The field AllowInactiveVals is set to false, but in the Prometheus labels, it's represented as "0". For clarity and consistency, consider representing boolean values as "true" or "false" in the labels.
Apply this diff to align the label value with the boolean representation:
assert.InEpsilon(t, float64(1), testutil.ToFloat64(consumerInfoGauge.With(prometheus.Labels{
"chain_id": "chain-id",
"consumer_id": "0",
"provider": "provider",
"phase": "CONSUMER_PHASE_LAUNCHED",
- "allow_inactive_vals": "0",
+ "allow_inactive_vals": "false",
})), 0.01)Also applies to: 69-69
There was a problem hiding this comment.
no, it's converted to int
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@freak12techno Understood, thank you for the clarification.
(•‿•) Thinking deeply...
✏️ Learnings added
Learnt from: freak12techno
PR: QuokkaStake/cosmos-validators-exporter#83
File: pkg/generators/consumer_info_test.go:38-38
Timestamp: 2024-09-25T12:58:27.807Z
Learning: In this codebase, boolean values are converted to integers when used in Prometheus labels, with `false` represented as `"0"` and `true` as `"1"`.
Note: Learnings are effective only in the context of similar code segments. To apply general coding guidelines, please configure review instructions. You can manage existing learnings in the app.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
consumer-idto replacechain-idin various configuration files, enhancing identification mechanisms for consumers.consumer_idandphasein consumer information data structures.Bug Fixes
Documentation
Tests