Skip to content
New issue

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

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

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: issues with cross-model comparison identification and injection #1508

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2024

Conversation

ymc9
Copy link
Member

@ymc9 ymc9 commented Jun 14, 2024

Fixes #1506 #1507

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jun 14, 2024

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The updates include minor version increment for the JetBrains IDE plugin, refactoring of policy traversal logic in policy-utils.ts, removal of a method in policy-guard-generator.ts, adjustments for entity checks in utils.ts, and introduction of regression test cases addressing issues #1506 and #1507. The changes aim to improve recursion and validation handling, correct cross-model field comparison, and ensure accurate functionality through testing.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
packages/ide/jetbrains/build.gradle.kts Updated version from 2.2.1 to 2.2.2 for JetBrains IDE plugin.
packages/runtime/src/enhancements/policy/policy-utils.ts Refactored target fields traversal in PolicyUtil for better recursion and object validation.
.../schema/src/plugins/enhancer/policy/policy-guard-generator.ts Removed generateFieldReadCheckerFunction; modified transform calls to include an additional argument.
.../schema/src/plugins/enhancer/policy/utils.ts Updated generateEntityCheckerFunction and hasCrossModelComparison for improved entity check handling.
tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts Introduced a test case to address improper cross-model field comparison resulting in incorrect query results.
tests/regression/tests/issue-1507.test.ts Added a regression test case to verify authorization rules and database operations for User and Profile models.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Correct cross-model field comparison (1506)
Verify authorization rules with read permissions (1507)

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

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

‼️ IMPORTANT
Auto-reply has been disabled for this repository in the CodeRabbit settings. The CodeRabbit bot will not respond to your replies unless it is explicitly tagged.

  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

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

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

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

Documentation and Community

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

@ymc9 ymc9 changed the base branch from main to dev June 14, 2024 11:46
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 2

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
packages/runtime/src/enhancements/policy/policy-utils.ts (1)

Line range hint 523-523: Consider replacing delete with undefined assignment for performance.

- delete entityData[field];
+ entityData[field] = undefined;

Using delete can potentially degrade performance by causing deoptimizations in JavaScript engines like V8. It's generally more performant to set properties to undefined if they are not required later, as this avoids changing the underlying structure of the object.

Also applies to: 1108-1108

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 28eca18 and 10981c5.

Files ignored due to path filters (13)
  • package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/ide/jetbrains/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/language/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/misc/redwood/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/plugins/openapi/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/plugins/swr/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/plugins/tanstack-query/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/plugins/trpc/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/runtime/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/schema/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/sdk/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/server/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
  • packages/testtools/package.json is excluded by !**/*.json
Files selected for processing (6)
  • packages/ide/jetbrains/build.gradle.kts (1 hunks)
  • packages/runtime/src/enhancements/policy/policy-utils.ts (1 hunks)
  • packages/schema/src/plugins/enhancer/policy/policy-guard-generator.ts (2 hunks)
  • packages/schema/src/plugins/enhancer/policy/utils.ts (2 hunks)
  • tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts (1 hunks)
  • tests/regression/tests/issue-1507.test.ts (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
  • packages/ide/jetbrains/build.gradle.kts
Additional context used
Biome
packages/schema/src/plugins/enhancer/policy/utils.ts

[error] 107-111: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 194-196: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 197-199: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 200-221: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 207-211: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 212-221: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)


[error] 215-221: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)


[error] 281-283: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.

packages/schema/src/plugins/enhancer/policy/policy-guard-generator.ts

[error] 653-655: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.

packages/runtime/src/enhancements/policy/policy-utils.ts

[error] 65-69: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 67-69: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)


[error] 79-83: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 81-83: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)


[error] 92-96: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 94-96: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)


[error] 105-110: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 116-118: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 378-380: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 416-426: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 523-523: Avoid the delete operator which can impact performance. (lint/performance/noDelete)

Unsafe fix: Use an undefined assignment instead.


[error] 867-869: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 1108-1108: Avoid the delete operator which can impact performance. (lint/performance/noDelete)

Unsafe fix: Use an undefined assignment instead.


[error] 1248-1250: This else clause can be omitted because previous branches break early. (lint/style/noUselessElse)

Unsafe fix: Omit the else clause.


[error] 1440-1445: This function expression can be turned into an arrow function. (lint/complexity/useArrowFunction)

Function expressions that don't use this can be turned into arrow functions.
Safe fix: Use an arrow function instead.

Additional comments not posted (9)
tests/regression/tests/issue-1507.test.ts (3)

1-1: Ensure the loadSchema function is correctly imported and utilized.


6-16: The model definitions and authorization setup look correct and align with the requirements of issue #1507.


21-25: The data creation and assertions are appropriate for testing the authorization rules specified in the model Profile. However, ensure that the test covers all necessary scenarios.

tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts (3)

1-1: Ensure the loadSchema function is correctly imported and utilized.


6-31: The model definitions and relationships are set up correctly to simulate the conditions described in issue #1506.


36-55: The data creation and assertions seem to properly test the cross-model field comparisons. However, verify that the test accurately reflects the intended behavior and catches potential issues.

Verification successful

The test case in tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts accurately reflects the intended behavior and includes appropriate assertions to catch potential issues. The data creation and subsequent assertions verify that the cross-model field comparisons are functioning correctly.

  • The test sets up a schema with models A, B, and C.
  • It creates an instance of model A, which is related to model B, and model B is related to model C.
  • The test then reads from the database and verifies that the relationships are correctly established.
Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that the test accurately reflects the intended behavior.

# Test: Check for additional test cases and assertions in the file.
rg --type typescript 'it(' 'tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts'

Length of output: 127



Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that the test accurately reflects the intended behavior.

# Test: Check for additional test cases and assertions in the file.
rg --type typescript 'it\(' 'tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts'

Length of output: 106



Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that the test accurately reflects the intended behavior.

# Test: Check for additional test cases and assertions in the file.
rg 'it\(' 'tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts'

Length of output: 88



Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Extract the content of the regression test case for review.

# Extract the content of the test case
rg -A 20 'it\(' 'tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts'

Length of output: 693



Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Extract the full content of the regression test case for review.

# Extract the content of the test case with more lines
rg -A 50 'it\(' 'tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts'

Length of output: 1454



Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Extract the full content of the regression test case for review.

# Extract the content of the test case with even more lines
rg -A 100 'it\(' 'tests/regression/tests/issue-1506.test.ts'

Length of output: 1545

packages/schema/src/plugins/enhancer/policy/utils.ts (1)

486-490: The handling of auth() invocation in getSourceModelOfFieldAccess is essential for correct cross-model comparison. This change appears to address a specific case mentioned in the PR description.

packages/runtime/src/enhancements/policy/policy-utils.ts (2)

1077-1087: Optimized object checking in injectReadCheckSelect method.

The refactoring in the injectReadCheckSelect method, which now iterates over keys of visitTarget and checks if the field is a data model, is a good improvement. It simplifies the logic and makes it more readable by ensuring visitTarget[key] is an object before proceeding with recursive injection.


Line range hint 65-69: Consider removing unnecessary else clauses.
[REFACTOR_SUGGESTion]

- else {
+ {

The static analysis tool has flagged several unnecessary else clauses following return statements. Removing these can simplify the code and reduce unnecessary nesting, making the logic clearer and more straightforward.

Also applies to: 67-69, 79-83, 81-83, 92-96, 94-96, 105-110, 116-118, 378-380, 416-426, 867-869, 1248-1250

@ymc9 ymc9 merged commit 665f9b3 into dev Jun 14, 2024
13 checks passed
@ymc9 ymc9 deleted the fix/issue-1506-1507 branch June 14, 2024 12:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Cross-model field comparison causes incorrect query result
1 participant