Add FhirEngine interface method 'withTransaction' #2535
Conversation
To support performing FhirEngine actions as a single atomic transaction
LZRS
force-pushed
the
2531-fhirengine-interface
branch
from
13b83cb
to
bf90f8c
Compare
LZRS
force-pushed
the
2531-fhirengine-interface
branch
from
bf90f8c
to
72be126
Compare
engine/src/test/java/com/google/android/fhir/impl/FhirEngineImplTest.kt
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
to better reflect need for atomic transactions
|
Note: Sync APIs are deprecated now and once removed we probably dont need the CRUDEngine interface. |
|
happy to merge once jajoo's comment's resolved. discussed with @aditya-07 who's also ok with this. |
FORK
- With unmerged PR #9
- WUP #13
SDK
- WUP google#2178
- WUP google#2650
- WUP google#2663
PERF
- WUP google#2669
- WUP google#2565
- WUP google#2561
- WUP google#2535
FORK
- With unmerged PR #9
- WUP #13
SDK
- WUP google#2178
- WUP google#2650
- WUP google#2663
PERF
- WUP google#2669
- WUP google#2565
- WUP google#2561
- WUP google#2535
and removed the CRUDEngine interface
LZRS
force-pushed
the
2531-fhirengine-interface
branch
from
3af9d14
to
b520d30
Compare
| @@ -97,6 +97,10 @@ internal class FhirEngineImpl(private val database: Database, private val contex | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| override suspend fun withTransaction(block: suspend FhirEngine.() -> Unit) { | |||
| database.withTransaction { block.invoke(this@FhirEngineImpl) } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does this work?
| database.withTransaction { block.invoke(this@FhirEngineImpl) } | |
| database.withTransaction { this.block() } |
| @@ -783,6 +788,132 @@ class FhirEngineImplTest { | |||
| assertThat(services.database.getLocalChangesCount()).isEqualTo(0) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| @Test | |||
| fun `withTransaction saves all changes successfully in order`() = runTest { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you simplify this test case?
I think you should keep this test case to use at most 2 resources. For example a patient and an observation. this is because when you add more resources to reference each other it's not really testing anything new.
Even just create a patient and then an observation that references the patient in my opinion is enough.
The point of the transation API isn't that things happen in order.... things will be executed in order without transation. The point is really that a transaction is atomic and will be reverted as a whole. So this test case should just be simply testing that the transation api runs multiple operations. the next test case is more important.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| fun `withTransaction reverts all changes when an error occurs`() = runTest { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this test case can be done using 2 resources.
before transation:
create a patient
in a transation:
create an encoutner for the patient, update the encouter to reference a non-existent patient.
check that the encounter is also rolled back.
IMPORTANT: All PRs must be linked to an issue (except for extremely trivial and straightforward changes).
Fixes #2531
Description
Support performing FhirEngine actions as a single atomic transaction
Alternative(s) considered
Have you considered any alternatives? And if so, why have you chosen the approach in this PR?
Type
Choose one: (Bug fix | Feature | Documentation | Testing | Code health | Builds | Releases | Other)
Screenshots (if applicable)
Checklist
./gradlew spotlessApplyand./gradlew spotlessCheckto check my code follows the style guide of this project../gradlew checkand./gradlew connectedCheckto test my changes locally.