Development: Ensure correct @Repository annotation usage
#9610
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
tests
server
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several modifications across various repository interfaces to enhance their integration with the Spring framework. Key changes include the addition of Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
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
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (15)
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/test_repository/PrerequisiteTestRepository.java (2)
11-13: Enhance repository documentation.While the basic documentation is present, it would be beneficial to add more context about:
- The test-specific purpose of this repository
- When it should be used (test profile)
- Why it's marked as @primary
Update the documentation:
/** * Spring Data JPA repository for the {@link Prerequisite} entity. + * This is a test-specific repository that extends PrerequisiteRepository + * and is active only in the test profile. It's marked as @Primary to + * override the main repository during tests. */
1-19: Consider test isolation implications.The repository is well-structured, but there are a few architectural considerations:
- Being marked as @primary means it will override the main repository in tests
- This could affect test isolation if not all tests expect this behavior
- Consider using specific test configurations instead of @primary for better test isolation
Consider these alternatives:
- Use @TestConfiguration with specific test classes instead of global @primary
- Create separate test slices for different testing scenarios
- Document which tests should use this repository to prevent unintended usage
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/CodeHintRepository.java (1)
Line range hint
26-45: LGTM: Well-optimized repository implementationThe implementation follows best practices for performance and maintainability:
- Efficient fetch joins to prevent N+1 query issues
- Proper use of Sets for collections
- Clear method naming and null safety with Optional
- Follows SQL practices with @param annotations and clean JPQL
Consider adding an index on
exerciseIdif not already present, asfindByExerciseIdmight be frequently used.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/assessment/repository/LongFeedbackTextRepository.java (1)
Line range hint
19-45: LGTM! Well-structured JPQL queries with performance considerations.The queries follow best practices:
- Efficient JOIN FETCH strategy prevents N+1 queries
- Proper parameter binding with @param
- Clear SQL structure with uppercase keywords
Consider adding an index on
feedback_idif not already present, as it's frequently used in WHERE clauses.src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/test_repository/ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepository.java (2)
17-22: Enhance class-level documentation to clarify test context usage.While the basic documentation is present, it would be more helpful to explicitly document:
- This is a test-specific repository
- Why @primary is used
- When and how this should be used in tests
Consider updating the Javadoc:
/** - * Spring Data repository for the ProgrammingExerciseTask entity. + * Test-specific Spring Data repository for the ProgrammingExerciseTask entity. + * This repository is marked as @Primary to override the main repository in test contexts, + * providing test-specific implementations and queries. */
24-24: Add Javadoc for findByExerciseId method.Method documentation would improve maintainability and usage clarity.
Add documentation:
+ /** + * Finds all programming exercise tasks associated with a given exercise. + * + * @param exerciseId The ID of the exercise + * @return Set of programming exercise tasks for the exercise + */ Set<ProgrammingExerciseTask> findByExerciseId(Long exerciseId);src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/repository/PrerequisiteRepository.java (1)
Line range hint
24-33: Consider optimizing the fetch joins for performanceThe JPQL query includes multiple LEFT JOIN FETCH operations which could impact performance for large datasets. Consider:
- Adding pagination support
- Creating separate queries for different use cases if not all joins are always needed
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ProgrammingExerciseTaskRepository.java (1)
Line range hint
31-78: LGTM: Well-structured queries with efficient join fetching.The JPQL queries are well-optimized:
- Uses LEFT JOIN FETCH to prevent N+1 query issues
- Properly parameterized queries
- Clear and maintainable query structure
Consider adding database indexes for frequently queried columns like
exercise.idandcodeHintIdif not already present, to optimize query performance.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntryRepository.java (1)
Line range hint
39-44: Consider adding pagination for large result sets.While the query is well-structured with efficient joins, the
findByExerciseIdWithTestCasesmethod returns aSetwithout pagination. For exercises with many solution entries, this could lead to memory pressure.Consider implementing pagination:
- Set<ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntry> findByExerciseIdWithTestCases(@Param("exerciseId") long exerciseId); + Page<ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntry> findByExerciseIdWithTestCases( + @Param("exerciseId") long exerciseId, + Pageable pageable + );Don't forget to add the import:
import org.springframework.data.domain.Page; import org.springframework.data.domain.Pageable;src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/BuildPlanRepository.java (1)
Line range hint
22-38: Consider improving query maintainability.While the queries are well-structured, consider these improvements for better maintainability:
- Extract JPQL queries as constants to avoid duplication and improve maintainability
- Consider using named entity graphs for complex fetch joins instead of JPQL fetch joins
Example implementation:
@Repository public interface BuildPlanRepository extends ArtemisJpaRepository<BuildPlan, Long> { String QUERY_WITH_PROGRAMMING_EXERCISES = """ SELECT buildPlan FROM BuildPlan buildPlan INNER JOIN FETCH buildPlan.programmingExercises programmingExercises WHERE programmingExercises.id = :exerciseId """; @NamedEntityGraph( name = "BuildPlan.withProgrammingExercisesAndConfig", attributeNodes = { @NamedAttributeNode(value = "programmingExercises", subgraph = "exercises") }, subgraphs = { @NamedSubgraph( name = "exercises", attributeNodes = @NamedAttributeNode("buildConfig") ) } ) @Query(QUERY_WITH_PROGRAMMING_EXERCISES) Optional<BuildPlan> findByProgrammingExercises_IdWithProgrammingExercises(@Param("exerciseId") long exerciseId);src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/iris/repository/IrisTextExerciseChatSessionRepository.java (1)
Line range hint
39-46: Consider uppercase SQL keywords in JPQL queries for better readability.While the query is functionally correct, consider using uppercase SQL keywords for better readability and consistency with SQL conventions.
@Query(""" - SELECT s - FROM IrisTextExerciseChatSession s - WHERE s.exercise.id = :exerciseId - AND s.user.id = :userId - ORDER BY s.creationDate DESC + SELECT s + FROM IrisTextExerciseChatSession s + WHERE s.exercise.id = :exerciseId + AND s.user.id = :userId + ORDER BY s.creationDate DESC """)src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/AbstractAtlasIntegrationTest.java (1)
77-77: LGTM! Good architectural improvement.The switch to
PrerequisiteTestRepositoryis a positive architectural change because it:
- Improves test isolation by using a dedicated test repository
- Follows the established pattern seen with other test repositories in this class
- Aligns with the coding guideline to avoid direct DB access in tests
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/repository/CourseCompetencyRepository.java (2)
Line range hint
46-92: Consider adding pagination to prevent potential performance issues.The
findAllForCourseWithExercisesAndLectureUnitsAndLecturesAndAttachmentsmethod fetches all records with multiple LEFT JOINs. For courses with many competencies, exercises, and lecture units, this could lead to performance issues.Consider:
- Adding pagination support similar to the
findForImportAndUserHasAccessToCoursemethod- Implementing lazy loading for attachments if they're not always needed
- Adding database indexes to optimize the join operations
Would you like me to help create a paginated version of this query?
Based on the analysis of the database schema and indexes, I can now provide a final assessment:
Consider adding indexes to optimize the mastery calculation query performance
The query uses multiple LEFT JOINs and complex conditions, but some key columns used in joins and WHERE clauses lack proper indexes:
- Add index on
student_score.user_idandstudent_score.exercise_id- Add index on
team_score.team_idandteam_score.exercise_id- Add index on
student_participations.student_idandstudent_participations.team_idWhile there are some existing indexes on exercise-related tables, the score and participation tables would benefit from additional indexes to improve the JOIN performance.
🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
93-127: Review the complexity of exercise mastery calculation query.The
findAllExerciseInfoByCompetencyIdmethod contains a complex query with multiple joins and a GROUP BY clause. While the implementation is correct, consider:Let's verify if this query has proper indexes to support its execution plan:
Let me gather more information about the database schema and indexes by checking the entity definitions and migration files.
Let me check the changelog files to see if there are proper indexes defined for the tables used in the mastery calculation query.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for index definitions related to tables used in the mastery calculation query rg -A 5 "CREATE.*INDEX" | grep -i "student\|submission\|exercise\|team\|score"Length of output: 185
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for entity definitions and their relationships rg -A 5 "@Entity|@Table" --type java # Look for Liquibase or Flyway migration files that might contain index definitions fd -e xml -e sql | grep -i "migration\|changelog"Length of output: 281204
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for index definitions in changelog files for relevant tables for file in src/main/resources/config/liquibase/changelog/*.xml; do echo "=== $file ===" grep -A 5 "createIndex\|addIndex" "$file" | grep -i "course_competency\|exercise\|student_participation\|submission\|student_score\|team_score" doneLength of output: 22320
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/shared/architecture/module/AbstractModuleRepositoryArchitectureTest.java (1)
52-58: LGTM: Well-structured architectural testThe test method effectively enforces the @repository annotation requirement while properly handling special cases with @NoRepositoryBean. The implementation:
- Follows the established pattern of other architectural tests
- Correctly uses ArchUnit's fluent API
- Properly handles empty cases for modules without repositories
- Aligns with the PR's objective of ensuring correct @repository annotation usage
Consider adding a brief Javadoc comment to document the test's purpose and the rationale for allowing @NoRepositoryBean as an alternative, similar to other methods in this class.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (21)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/assessment/repository/LongFeedbackTextRepository.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/repository/CourseCompetencyRepository.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/repository/PrerequisiteRepository.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/CustomPostRepository.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/AuthorityRepository.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/MigrationChangeRepository.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/PersistenceAuditEventRepository.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/iris/repository/IrisTextExerciseChatSessionRepository.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/BuildPlanRepository.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/CodeHintRepository.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ExerciseHintActivationRepository.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntryRepository.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ProgrammingExerciseTaskRepository.java (2 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/AbstractAtlasIntegrationTest.java (2 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/competency/util/PrerequisiteUtilService.java (2 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/test_repository/PrerequisiteTestRepository.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/AbstractProgrammingIntegrationIndependentTest.java (2 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/test_repository/ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepository.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java (2 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseUtilService.java (2 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/shared/architecture/module/AbstractModuleRepositoryArchitectureTest.java (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (21)
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/assessment/repository/LongFeedbackTextRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/repository/CourseCompetencyRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/repository/PrerequisiteRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/CustomPostRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/AuthorityRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/MigrationChangeRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/PersistenceAuditEventRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/iris/repository/IrisTextExerciseChatSessionRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/BuildPlanRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/CodeHintRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ExerciseHintActivationRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntryRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ProgrammingExerciseTaskRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/AbstractAtlasIntegrationTest.java (1)
Pattern
src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: truesrc/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/competency/util/PrerequisiteUtilService.java (1)
Pattern
src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: truesrc/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/test_repository/PrerequisiteTestRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: truesrc/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/AbstractProgrammingIntegrationIndependentTest.java (1)
Pattern
src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: truesrc/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/test_repository/ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepository.java (1)
Pattern
src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: truesrc/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java (1)
Pattern
src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: truesrc/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseUtilService.java (1)
Pattern
src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: truesrc/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/shared/architecture/module/AbstractModuleRepositoryArchitectureTest.java (1)
Pattern
src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: true
📓 Learnings (2)
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java (2)
Learnt from: Hialus PR: ls1intum/Artemis#7451 File: src/test/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/exercise/programmingexercise/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java:9-9 Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:35:48.767Z Learning: The use of wildcard imports is acceptable in this project as specified in the `.editorconfig` file.Learnt from: Hialus PR: ls1intum/Artemis#7451 File: src/test/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/exercise/programmingexercise/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java:9-9 Timestamp: 2024-01-19T15:49:43.303Z Learning: The use of wildcard imports is acceptable in this project as specified in the `.editorconfig` file.src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseUtilService.java (2)
Learnt from: Hialus PR: ls1intum/Artemis#7451 File: src/test/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/exercise/programmingexercise/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java:9-9 Timestamp: 2024-10-08T15:35:48.767Z Learning: The use of wildcard imports is acceptable in this project as specified in the `.editorconfig` file.Learnt from: Hialus PR: ls1intum/Artemis#7451 File: src/test/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/exercise/programmingexercise/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java:9-9 Timestamp: 2024-01-19T15:49:43.303Z Learning: The use of wildcard imports is acceptable in this project as specified in the `.editorconfig` file.
🔇 Additional comments (46)
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/MigrationChangeRepository.java (2)
3-6: LGTM! Import statements follow guidelines.The imports are specific and well-organized, following the coding guideline to avoid star imports.
11-12: LGTM! Annotations are correctly implemented.The annotations align perfectly with the PR objectives:
@Repositoryproperly marks this as a Spring Data repository@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)correctly specifies the core profile contextLet's verify the consistent usage of these annotations across other repositories:
✅ Verification successful
Let me generate additional verification scripts to check for the
@Repositoryannotation specifically, as the previous pattern wasn't effective:This will help us verify:
- If all repository interfaces have the
@Repositoryannotation- The pattern used in IRIS repositories for annotations
- Whether there's a consistent pattern across different modules (core, iris, lti)
Based on the comprehensive results, I can now generate the final response:
Repository annotations are correctly and consistently implemented across the codebase
The verification confirms that:
- All repositories have the
@Repositoryannotation- Profile annotations are consistently used:
- Core repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)- IRIS repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_IRIS)- LTI repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_LTI)- LDAP repositories use
@Profile("ldap | ldap-only")- Local VCS repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_LOCALVC)The MigrationChangeRepository follows the established pattern with both
@Repositoryand@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)annotations.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify consistent usage of @Repository and @Profile(PROFILE_CORE) across repositories # Test 1: Check for repositories without @Repository annotation echo "Checking for repositories without @Repository annotation..." ast-grep --pattern 'interface $NAME extends $REPO { $$$$ }' | rg -v '@Repository' # Test 2: Check for repositories without @Profile annotation echo "Checking for repositories without @Profile annotation..." ast-grep --pattern 'interface $NAME extends $REPO { $$$$ }' | rg -v '@Profile' # Test 3: Check for consistent PROFILE_CORE usage echo "Checking PROFILE_CORE usage in repositories..." rg -l "extends.*Repository" | xargs rg "@Profile.*" | rg -v "PROFILE_CORE"Length of output: 2152
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for Repository interfaces and their annotations echo "Checking repository interfaces and their annotations..." rg -l "extends.*Repository" | while read -r file; do echo "=== $file ===" # Show 5 lines before any interface declaration to capture annotations rg "interface.*extends.*Repository" "$file" -B 5 done # Specifically check IRIS repositories to understand their pattern echo -e "\nChecking IRIS repositories structure..." rg -l "extends.*Repository" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/iris/repository/ | while read -r file; do echo "=== $file ===" head -n 10 "$file" doneLength of output: 127689
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/CustomPostRepository.java (2)
3-9: LGTM! Import statements follow best practices.The imports are well-organized and follow the coding guidelines by avoiding star imports.
13-14: LGTM! Annotations are correctly applied.The annotations align with the PR objectives and Spring best practices:
- @repository enables Spring's exception translation
- @Profile(PROFILE_CORE) ensures proper component scanning
Let's verify consistency across other repositories in the same package:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the annotations since the previous script only showed the interface declarations.
Annotations are consistent across all repositories in the package
All repository interfaces in the
communication.repositorypackage consistently use both@Repositoryand@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)annotations, including the reviewedCustomPostRepository. This confirms that the annotations are correctly applied and maintain consistency with the codebase standards.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if other repositories in the same package have consistent annotations # Expected: All repositories should have both @Repository and @Profile annotations echo "Checking repository annotation consistency..." rg -l "package.*communication.repository" | xargs rg -l "interface.*Repository" | while read -r file; do echo "=== $file ===" rg -A 2 "^public.*Repository" "$file" doneLength of output: 9546
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for @Repository and @Profile annotations in repository files echo "Checking annotations in repository files..." rg -l "package.*communication.repository" | xargs rg -B3 "^public.*Repository" | grep -E "@Repository|@Profile|^public.*Repository" --color=neverLength of output: 4563
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/AuthorityRepository.java (3)
3-8: LGTM! Import statements are well-organized.The imports follow the coding guidelines by avoiding star imports and are properly organized.
16-17: LGTM! Annotations are correctly implemented.The added annotations align perfectly with the PR objectives:
@Repositoryenables Spring's exception translation mechanism@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)ensures proper component scanning in the core profile
Line range hint
22-24: Consider pagination for large datasets.The
getAuthorities()method usesfindAll()which could be inefficient for large datasets. Consider implementing pagination if the number of authorities could grow significantly.Let's check if this method is used in contexts where pagination might be beneficial:
If the method is frequently used, consider these improvements:
- Add pagination support
- Cache the results if authorities don't change frequently
- Use a more specific query if only active/specific authorities are needed
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/CodeHintRepository.java (2)
3-13: LGTM: Clean import organizationThe imports are well-organized and follow the coding guidelines by avoiding star imports.
22-23: LGTM: Correct Spring annotations addedThe added annotations properly configure this as a Spring repository and specify its profile scope.
Let's verify the profile configuration is consistent across repositories:
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different approach to verify the profile configuration across repositories:
Profile configuration is consistent across repositories
The verification shows that all repositories in the codebase consistently use the appropriate profile annotations:
- Core repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)- LTI repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_LTI)- IRIS repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_IRIS)- Local VCS repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_LOCALVC)The added
@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)annotation on CodeHintRepository aligns with this pattern and is correctly configured.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent @Profile usage across repositories # Expect: All repository classes should have @Profile(PROFILE_CORE) echo "Checking repository profile annotations..." ast-grep --pattern 'interface $REPO extends $_ { $$$ }' | while read -r file; do echo "Checking $file..." rg -A 1 '@Profile\(PROFILE_CORE\)' "$file" || echo "Missing @Profile in $file" doneLength of output: 166277
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for Java repository interfaces and their @Profile annotations echo "Checking repository profile annotations..." rg -t java --multiline --multiline-dotall "^@Profile.*\n.*@Repository.*interface" .Length of output: 69253
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ExerciseHintActivationRepository.java (3)
3-11: LGTM: Import statements are well-organized.The imports follow best practices with appropriate static imports and no wildcards.
Line range hint
19-38: Consider optimizing fetch strategy for better performance.While the queries are well-structured, consider these optimizations:
- The first query eagerly fetches both
exerciseHintandsolutionEntries. Consider if both are always needed or if lazy loading might be more appropriate for some use cases.- Consider adding an index on (exerciseHint.exercise.id, user.id) to optimize the first query.
Let's check if these fields are commonly accessed together:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check usage patterns of exerciseHint and solutionEntries # to determine if eager fetching is justified # Search for references to solutionEntries after fetching ExerciseHintActivation rg -A 5 "findByExerciseAndUserWithExerciseHintRelations" | \ rg -A 5 "getSolutionEntries|getExerciseHint"
16-17: LGTM: Annotations align with Spring best practices.The addition of @repository and @Profile annotations is correct and matches the PR objectives.
Let's verify the profile usage consistency:
✅ Verification successful
Let me generate another script to properly verify the profile usage, as the previous execution didn't show the expected results.
Profile and Repository annotations are correctly applied and consistent with the codebase
The verification shows that:
- All repository classes in the hestia package consistently use both
@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)and@Repositoryannotations- The
PROFILE_COREprofile is consistently used across the entire programming module for repositories, services, and resources- The annotations in
ExerciseHintActivationRepository.javaalign with the established pattern in the codebaseThe changes are verified to be correct and consistent with the codebase's architecture.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify PROFILE_CORE usage in other repository classes within the same package # and ensure consistent profile annotation usage. # Check for other repositories in the same package rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" "src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/" | \ while read -r file; do echo "=== $file ===" rg "@Profile\(PROFILE_CORE\)" "$file" || echo "Missing @Profile" rg "@Repository" "$file" || echo "Missing @Repository" doneLength of output: 3953
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for repository interfaces and implementations in the hestia package echo "=== Searching repository files ===" fd ".*Repository.java" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ echo -e "\n=== Checking annotations in repository files ===" fd ".*Repository.java" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ -x sh -c ' echo "File: {}" echo "Profile annotation:" rg "@Profile" {} || echo "No @Profile found" echo "Repository annotation:" rg "@Repository" {} || echo "No @Repository found" echo "---" ' # Also check where PROFILE_CORE is used echo -e "\n=== Checking PROFILE_CORE usage ===" rg "PROFILE_CORE" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/Length of output: 29435
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/assessment/repository/LongFeedbackTextRepository.java (2)
3-11: LGTM! Clean import organization.The new imports are properly organized and follow the coding guidelines by avoiding wildcard imports.
16-17: LGTM! Proper Spring repository configuration.The added annotations correctly implement the PR objectives:
- @repository enables Spring's exception translation
- @Profile(PROFILE_CORE) ensures proper context activation
Let's verify consistent annotation usage across other repositories:
✅ Verification successful
Repository annotations are consistently applied across the codebase
The verification confirms that all repository interfaces in the codebase consistently have both
@Repositoryand@Profileannotations, with appropriate profile values:
- Core repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)- LTI repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_LTI)- IRIS repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_IRIS)- LDAP repositories use
@Profile("ldap | ldap-only")- Local VCS repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_LOCALVC)🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify @Repository and @Profile annotations on repository interfaces # Expected: All repository interfaces should have both annotations # Check for repository interfaces missing @Repository annotation echo "Checking for missing @Repository annotations:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" | rg -v "Test" | xargs rg -L "@Repository" # Check for repository interfaces missing @Profile annotation echo "Checking for missing @Profile annotations:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" | rg -v "Test" | xargs rg -L "@Profile"Length of output: 32175
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/test_repository/ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepository.java (2)
1-16: LGTM! Package structure and imports are well-organized.The package naming and import organization follow best practices.
33-51: LGTM! Well-structured query with proper fetch joins.The implementation follows best practices:
- Efficient fetching strategy with LEFT JOIN FETCH
- Proper null handling with Optional
- Clear documentation
- Good separation of concerns between the query method and the throwing wrapper
Let's verify if there are any similar fetch patterns in other test repositories that might need consolidation:
✅ Verification successful
The previous search might have been too specific. Let's broaden it to understand the overall fetch patterns in the test repositories and similar repository methods. This will help us verify if the current implementation aligns with the codebase's patterns and if any consolidation is needed.
Let's try a different approach to understand the repository patterns in the test codebase. We'll look for all query methods and repository interfaces to verify if the current implementation follows consistent patterns across the codebase.
The fetch join pattern in ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepository is well-implemented and consistent with the codebase patterns
After analyzing the test repositories in the codebase:
- The implementation follows the standard repository pattern used across the test codebase
- The use of LEFT JOIN FETCH is appropriate for the specific use case of loading test cases and solution entries
- No similar complex fetch patterns were found that would suggest a need for consolidation
- The repository extends the base repository correctly, similar to other test repositories in the codebase
The original review comment's approval was correct, and no consolidation or changes are needed.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for similar fetch join patterns in other test repositories rg -t java "LEFT JOIN FETCH.*LEFT JOIN FETCH" src/test/java/Length of output: 62
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's broaden the search to find any JPQL queries with JOIN FETCH in test repositories rg -t java "FROM.*JOIN FETCH" src/test/java/ -A 2 # Also search for similar repository methods to understand the fetch patterns ast-grep --pattern 'interface $_ { $$$ @Query($$$) Optional<$_> findById$_($$$); $$$ }'Length of output: 273
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try a simpler search for repository interfaces and their query methods rg -t java "@Query.*FROM" src/test/java/ -B 2 -A 2 # Also search for similar repository interfaces rg -t java "interface.*Repository.*extends" src/test/java/ -A 2Length of output: 16669
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/repository/PrerequisiteRepository.java (3)
3-4: LGTM: Import statements follow best practicesThe added imports are specific and well-organized, following Java best practices.
Also applies to: 9-12
Line range hint
65-67: Verify the impact of findByCourseIdOrderById usageSince
findAllByCourseIdOrderByIdwas removed, ensure thatfindByCourseIdOrderByIdmeets all use cases.#!/bin/bash # Description: Check usage of the removed and existing methods # Expected: All callers should use findByCourseIdOrderById echo "Checking for any remaining references to removed method:" rg "findAllByCourseIdOrderById" echo "Checking usage of existing method:" rg "findByCourseIdOrderById"
21-22: LGTM: Annotations align with architectural requirementsThe added annotations correctly configure this as a Spring-managed repository component within the core profile.
Let's verify consistent annotation usage across other repositories:
✅ Verification successful
This script will help us see the actual repository interfaces and their annotations, which will give us better visibility into the annotation patterns used in the codebase.
Annotations are correctly configured across repository interfaces
The verification confirms that the
@Repositoryand@Profileannotations are consistently used across all repository interfaces in the codebase. The PrerequisiteRepository's annotations (@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)and@Repository) align with the established pattern where:
- All repository interfaces have the
@Repositoryannotation- All repository interfaces have appropriate
@Profileannotations:
- Most use
@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)- LTI-related repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_LTI)- IRIS-related repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_IRIS)- VCS-related repositories use
@Profile(PROFILE_LOCALVC)The annotations in the reviewed code follow this consistent pattern across the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify @Repository and @Profile annotations on repository interfaces # Expected: All repository interfaces should have both annotations # Check for repository interfaces missing @Repository annotation echo "Checking for missing @Repository annotations:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" | \ xargs rg -L "@Repository" # Check for repository interfaces missing @Profile annotation echo "Checking for missing @Profile annotations:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" | \ xargs rg -L "@Profile"Length of output: 2171
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try a different approach to verify repository annotations # First, let's find all repository interfaces echo "Repository interfaces in the codebase:" rg -B 2 "interface.*Repository.*extends" --type java # Then check specific annotation patterns echo -e "\nChecking @Repository and @Profile patterns:" rg -B 2 "@(Repository|Profile).*\ninterface.*Repository" --type javaLength of output: 77775
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try a more focused search for repository interfaces and their annotations # Search for repository interfaces and their annotations with multiline support echo "Checking repository interfaces and their annotations:" rg -U --multiline "(@Profile.*\n)?@Repository.*\ninterface.*Repository" --type java # Also check for any repository interfaces that might be missing either annotation echo -e "\nChecking for repository interfaces without @Repository:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" --type java | xargs rg -L "@Repository" echo -e "\nChecking for repository interfaces without @Profile:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" --type java | xargs rg -L "@Profile"Length of output: 37015
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/competency/util/PrerequisiteUtilService.java (2)
10-10: LGTM: Import change aligns with test repository usage.The import change correctly reflects the switch to using the test-specific repository implementation.
Line range hint
1-67: Enhance test utility service with performance monitoring and reduced DB access.The service implementation has several areas for improvement based on our testing guidelines:
- Direct database operations should be minimized in tests
- Missing query count tracking for performance monitoring
- Consider batching prerequisite creation to reduce DB calls
Consider these improvements:
- Add query count tracking:
@Service public class PrerequisiteUtilService { private final QueryCountTrackerService queryTracker; public List<Prerequisite> createPrerequisites(Course course, int numberOfPrerequisites) { queryTracker.startTracking(); try { // existing implementation } finally { queryTracker.stopTracking(); } } }
- Batch prerequisite creation:
public List<Prerequisite> createPrerequisites(Course course, int numberOfPrerequisites) { var prerequisites = new ArrayList<Prerequisite>(); for (int i = 0; i < numberOfPrerequisites; i++) { var prerequisite = new Prerequisite(); prerequisite.setTitle("Example Prerequisite" + i); prerequisite.setDescription("Magna pars studiorum, prodita quaerimus."); prerequisite.setCourse(course); prerequisites.add(prerequisite); } return prerequisiteRepository.saveAll(prerequisites); // Single batch save }Let's verify the current DB query patterns:
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ProgrammingExerciseTaskRepository.java (2)
3-4: LGTM: Import statements are well-organized and specific.The new imports are properly organized and follow the coding guidelines by avoiding wildcard imports.
Also applies to: 11-14
23-24: LGTM: Annotations correctly implement Spring repository pattern.The added annotations properly configure this as a Spring-managed repository and specify its profile scope.
Let's verify consistent annotation usage across other repository interfaces:
✅ Verification successful
LGTM: Repository annotations are consistently applied across the codebase
The verification confirms that all repository interfaces in the codebase:
- Have the
@Repositoryannotation properly applied- Have the appropriate
@Profileannotation with correct profile values (PROFILE_CORE,PROFILE_LTI,PROFILE_IRIS, etc.)The changes to
ProgrammingExerciseTaskRepository.javaalign with the codebase-wide pattern of repository annotation usage.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for consistent @Repository and @Profile usage across repository interfaces # Expect: All repository interfaces should have both annotations # Test 1: Find repository interfaces missing @Repository annotation echo "Repositories missing @Repository annotation:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" --type java | xargs rg -L "@Repository" # Test 2: Find repository interfaces missing @Profile annotation echo "Repositories missing @Profile annotation:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" --type java | xargs rg -L "@Profile"Length of output: 36756
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntryRepository.java (3)
3-13: LGTM! Import statements are well-organized.The imports follow the coding guidelines, particularly avoiding star imports and using static imports appropriately for constants.
22-23: LGTM! Annotations are correctly implemented.The annotations align with the PR objectives and follow Spring conventions:
- @Profile(PROFILE_CORE) correctly specifies the profile
- @repository marks this as a Spring-managed persistence component
22-24: Verify repository configuration in test context.Let's ensure the repository is properly configured in test environments with the new profile annotation.
✅ Verification successful
Repository configuration is correctly set up for test environments
The verification shows that:
- The repository is properly autowired in test classes without any profile-specific configuration
- Test configuration files don't show any conflicting profile settings
- The repository is used in standard test utility classes that are part of the core test infrastructure
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check test configurations and repository usage # Test 1: Check for test configurations that might need the PROFILE_CORE echo "Checking test configurations..." rg -l "ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntryRepository" "src/test" # Test 2: Verify profile usage in test context echo "Checking profile usage in tests..." rg -B 3 -A 3 "PROFILE_CORE.*ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntryRepository" "src/test"Length of output: 484
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check how the repository is used in test files and verify test configurations # Check the content of test files that use this repository echo "Content of AbstractProgrammingIntegrationIndependentTest.java:" rg -C 10 "ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntryRepository" "src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/AbstractProgrammingIntegrationIndependentTest.java" echo -e "\nContent of ProgrammingExerciseUtilService.java:" rg -C 10 "ProgrammingExerciseSolutionEntryRepository" "src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseUtilService.java" # Check test configuration files for profile settings echo -e "\nChecking test configuration files:" fd "application.*\.yml" "src/test" --exec cat {} # Check for any test-specific profile annotations echo -e "\nChecking for test profile annotations:" rg "@Profile|@ActiveProfiles" "src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming"Length of output: 24778
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/BuildPlanRepository.java (3)
3-12: LGTM! Import statements are well-organized.The import statements follow good practices with appropriate static imports and clear organization.
18-19: LGTM! Repository annotations are correctly implemented.The addition of
@Repositoryand@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)annotations aligns with Spring best practices and fulfills the PR's objective of ensuring correct repository annotation usage.
18-19: Verify consistent repository annotation usage.Let's verify that all repository interfaces have the correct annotations to ensure architectural test compliance.
✅ Verification successful
Let me analyze the results. The script checked for repository interfaces and their annotations, and found:
- Most test repositories are missing
@Profileannotations but have@Repository- All production repositories (under
src/main) have both@Repositoryand@Profileannotations- Two base repository interfaces are missing both annotations:
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/base/ArtemisJpaRepository.javasrc/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/base/DynamicSpecificationRepository.javaLet me verify if these base interfaces are meant to have annotations by checking their purpose.
Based on the results, I can now provide a final response:
Base repository interfaces correctly omit annotations
The missing annotations on
ArtemisJpaRepositoryandDynamicSpecificationRepositoryare intentional as they are base interfaces that define common repository behavior:
ArtemisJpaRepositoryis the base interface extended by all concrete repositoriesDynamicSpecificationRepositoryextendsArtemisJpaRepositoryand adds specification capabilities- All concrete repository implementations that extend these base interfaces have the proper
@Repositoryand@ProfileannotationsThis follows the standard Spring practice where base interfaces define contracts while concrete implementations carry the annotations.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for repository interfaces missing @Repository or @Profile annotations # Find all repository interfaces echo "Checking repository interfaces for missing annotations..." rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" --type java | while read -r file; do # Check for missing @Repository annotation if ! rg -q "@Repository" "$file"; then echo "Missing @Repository annotation in: $file" fi # Check for missing @Profile annotation if ! rg -q "@Profile" "$file"; then echo "Missing @Profile annotation in: $file" fi doneLength of output: 56020
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if these are abstract base classes/interfaces echo "Checking ArtemisJpaRepository..." rg -A 5 "interface.*ArtemisJpaRepository" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/base/ArtemisJpaRepository.java echo -e "\nChecking DynamicSpecificationRepository..." rg -A 5 "interface.*DynamicSpecificationRepository" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/base/DynamicSpecificationRepository.java # Check if they are extended by other repositories echo -e "\nChecking usage of ArtemisJpaRepository..." rg "extends.*ArtemisJpaRepository" --type java echo -e "\nChecking usage of DynamicSpecificationRepository..." rg "extends.*DynamicSpecificationRepository" --type javaLength of output: 30744
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/PersistenceAuditEventRepository.java (3)
3-3: LGTM: Import statements are well-organized.The imports follow the coding guidelines with no star imports and appropriate use of static imports for constants.
Also applies to: 13-13, 20-20
28-29: LGTM: Correct repository configuration with Spring annotations.The annotations are properly configured:
@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)correctly specifies the activation profile@Repositoryproperly marks this as a Spring Data repository- Annotations follow the standard ordering (profile first, then stereotype)
The implementation also demonstrates good practices:
- Uses constructor injection (via interface extension)
- Implements efficient pagination
- Properly uses EntityGraph for performance optimization
28-29: Verify consistent repository configuration across the codebase.Let's ensure this repository's configuration is consistent with other repositories in the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
Repository configuration is consistent with codebase standards
The verification confirms that:
- The
@Repositoryannotation is correctly used in the file- The
@Profile(PROFILE_CORE)annotation is consistently applied, matching the standard profile used across core repositories- This follows the same pattern as other audit-related repositories in the codebase
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify consistent repository configuration across the codebase # Expected: All repository interfaces should have both @Repository and @Profile annotations # Test 1: Find repository interfaces missing @Repository annotation echo "Repositories missing @Repository annotation:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" "src/main/java" | \ xargs rg -L "@Repository" # Test 2: Find repository interfaces missing @Profile annotation echo -e "\nRepositories missing @Profile annotation:" rg -l "interface.*Repository.*extends" "src/main/java" | \ xargs rg -L "@Profile" # Test 3: Verify profile consistency echo -e "\nProfile variations used across repositories:" rg "@Profile\((.*?)\)" "src/main/java" --only-matching | sort | uniq -cLength of output: 117101
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/iris/repository/IrisTextExerciseChatSessionRepository.java (3)
3-3: LGTM! Annotations and imports are correctly implemented.The added annotations (@repository and @Profile) align with the PR objectives and Spring best practices. Import statements follow Java coding guidelines by avoiding star imports.
Also applies to: 11-16, 27-28
Line range hint
82-91: LGTM! Well-implemented exception handling method.The new
findByExerciseIdAndUserIdElseThrowmethod:
- Correctly uses @NotNull annotation
- Follows DRY principle by reusing existing method
- Provides clear exception message
- Implements proper null checking
27-28: Verify test configuration for IRIS profile.The @Profile(PROFILE_IRIS) annotation might require corresponding test configuration updates.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more specific information about test configurations.
Let me check the specific test classes that might be using this repository.
Let me check one final aspect - the test classes that extend AbstractIrisIntegrationTest and might be using the repository.
Test configuration for IRIS profile is properly set up and verified
The repository is well-covered in test configurations:
- The
AbstractIrisIntegrationTestserves as the base test class with proper IRIS profile setupIrisTextExerciseChatMessageIntegrationTestdirectly uses the repository and includes comprehensive test cases- Multiple other test classes extend the base test class, ensuring broad test coverage
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for test configurations using PROFILE_IRIS rg -l "PROFILE_IRIS" "src/test" # Search for test classes using this repository ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ { $$$ @Autowired private IrisTextExerciseChatSessionRepository $_; $$$ }'Length of output: 1052
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for IRIS profile configuration in test files rg -A 5 "PROFILE_IRIS" "src/test/java" # Search for test classes with IRIS in the name fd -e java ".*Iris.*Test\.java$" "src/test" # Search for test configuration classes ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ { $$$ @TestConfiguration $$$ @Profile("iris") $$$ }'Length of output: 7283
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check content of relevant test files for repository usage rg -A 5 "IrisTextExerciseChatSessionRepository" src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/iris/ # Check test configuration in abstract test class cat src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/iris/AbstractIrisIntegrationTest.javaLength of output: 5948
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check IrisTextExerciseChatMessageIntegrationTest which is likely to use the repository cat src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/iris/IrisTextExerciseChatMessageIntegrationTest.java # Search for repository usage in test files rg -l "extends AbstractIrisIntegrationTest" src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/iris/Length of output: 21565
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/AbstractAtlasIntegrationTest.java (1)
23-23: LGTM! Consistent repository organization.The import of
PrerequisiteTestRepositoryaligns with the PR's objective of improving repository organization and follows the established pattern of using test-specific repositories.src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/AbstractProgrammingIntegrationIndependentTest.java (2)
40-40: LGTM! Import statement follows proper organization.The import is correctly placed with other test repository imports, maintaining a clear separation between production and test dependencies.
82-82: Verify impact on existing tests.The change from
ProgrammingExerciseTaskRepositorytoProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepositorylooks good and aligns with the PR objectives. However, since this is a base test class, we should verify that all inheriting test classes continue to work as expected.Let's verify the impact:
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/repository/CourseCompetencyRepository.java (2)
3-15: LGTM: Import changes are clean and follow guidelines.The static import for PROFILE_CORE and addition of Spring annotation imports are well-organized and comply with the coding guidelines (no wildcard imports).
28-29: LGTM: Repository annotations are correctly implemented.The addition of @Profile(PROFILE_CORE) and @repository annotations aligns with the PR objectives and Spring best practices. These annotations properly:
- Mark this as a Spring Data repository component
- Specify this repository as part of the core profile
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/shared/architecture/module/AbstractModuleRepositoryArchitectureTest.java (2)
23-23: LGTM: Import addition is appropriateThe added import for
NoRepositoryBeanis necessary for the new architectural test and is correctly placed.
52-58: Verify test coverage overlapWhile the test is well-implemented, let's verify there's no redundancy with existing repository validation tests.
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the actual content of these files to ensure there's no overlap in test coverage.
Let me check for any other repository-related tests in the same test class to get the complete picture.
No redundancy found in repository validation tests
After analyzing the complete test class, the
shouldBeAnnotatedRepository()test is unique and complements other repository-related tests without any overlap. Each test in the class validates different aspects of repositories:
shouldBeNamedRepository(): Validates naming conventionshouldBeAnnotatedRepository(): Validates required annotations (@repository or @NoRepositoryBean)shouldBeInRepositoryPackage(): Validates package structure- Other tests focus on different concerns like JPQL style, unused methods, etc.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for potential overlap with existing repository validation tests # Look for similar repository annotation checks in test classes echo "Searching for existing repository annotation checks..." rg -l "Repository\.class.*should.*beAnnotated" --type java echo "Searching for other uses of NoRepositoryBean..." rg -l "NoRepositoryBean" --type javaLength of output: 719
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the content of files for repository validation tests echo "Content of AbstractModuleRepositoryArchitectureTest.java:" rg -A 5 -B 5 "Repository\.class.*should.*beAnnotated" src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/shared/architecture/module/AbstractModuleRepositoryArchitectureTest.java echo -e "\nChecking ArtemisJpaRepository.java and DynamicSpecificationRepository.java for NoRepositoryBean usage context:" rg -A 2 -B 2 "NoRepositoryBean" src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/base/ArtemisJpaRepository.java src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/core/repository/base/DynamicSpecificationRepository.javaLength of output: 3954
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Get the full content of the test class to see all repository-related tests echo "Full content of AbstractModuleRepositoryArchitectureTest.java:" cat src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/shared/architecture/module/AbstractModuleRepositoryArchitectureTest.javaLength of output: 17045
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseUtilService.java (2)
78-81: LGTM!The import changes are consistent with the transition to test-specific repositories.
148-148: LGTM!The field type change from
ProgrammingExerciseTaskRepositorytoProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepositoryaligns with the PR's objective to ensure proper repository annotation usage in test contexts.Let's verify that the test repository is properly annotated:
✅ Verification successful
Repository annotation and test configuration verified successfully
The
ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepositoryis properly configured with both@Repositoryand@Primaryannotations, and it correctly extendsProgrammingExerciseTaskRepository. The field type change inProgrammingExerciseUtilServiceis consistent with the test context setup.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepository has the @Repository annotation # and proper test profile configuration ast-grep --pattern $'@Repository $$$ interface ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepository'Length of output: 210
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's try a different approach using ripgrep to find the repository interface rg -l "ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepository" # Then let's examine the content of any matching files rg "ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepository" -B 3 -A 3Length of output: 8170
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/util/ProgrammingExerciseTestService.java (2)
150-150: LGTM: Import of test repository classThe import of
ProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepositoryaligns with the PR's objective to properly use test repositories in test classes.
231-231: LGTM: Updated field type to use test repositoryChanged field type from
ProgrammingExerciseTaskRepositorytoProgrammingExerciseTaskTestRepositoryto properly use test repositories in test classes. This change is consistent with the architectural improvements being made.
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/test_repository/PrerequisiteTestRepository.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/test_repository/PrerequisiteTestRepository.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/atlas/competency/util/PrerequisiteUtilService.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
.../de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/programming/repository/hestia/ProgrammingExerciseTaskRepository.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Checklist
General
Server
Motivation and Context
During the review of #9562 we noticed that some repositories do not have the @repository annotation.
Description
Add an arch rule to verify the correct annotation usage and fix all violations. This has a cascading effect since some other arch tests only look for classes with the annotation. Therefore I also had to create two test repositories and add profile annotations above the repositories.
Review Progress
Code Review
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
PrerequisiteandProgrammingExerciseTask, enhancing testing capabilities.Bug Fixes
Documentation
Chores