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

refac: Refactor Server.GetWorkflows() #17092

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Dec 6, 2024

Conversation

beingnoble03
Copy link
Member

@beingnoble03 beingnoble03 commented Oct 28, 2024

Description

  • Refactors GetWorkflows() monolithic function into utility functions in workflows.go
  • Makes use of named rows instead of index based in the utility functions
  • Adds tests for uncovered functions (fetchCopyStatesByShardStream, WorkflowStatus, getWorkflowCopyStates)

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
  • If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Oct 28, 2024

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Oct 28, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v22.0.0 milestone Oct 28, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 28, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 80.72805% with 90 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.44%. Comparing base (de16aff) to head (696a8a5).
Report is 45 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
go/vt/vtctl/workflow/workflows.go 80.30% 89 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtctl/workflow/server.go 93.33% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17092      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   67.33%   67.44%   +0.11%     
==========================================
  Files        1569     1575       +6     
  Lines      252506   253252     +746     
==========================================
+ Hits       170021   170809     +788     
+ Misses      82485    82443      -42     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@beingnoble03 beingnoble03 added Type: Internal Cleanup Component: VReplication and removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels Nov 7, 2024
@rohit-nayak-ps
Copy link
Contributor

Can you give the test coverage before and after?

@mattlord mattlord marked this pull request as ready for review November 8, 2024 16:13
@beingnoble03
Copy link
Member Author

beingnoble03 commented Nov 8, 2024

Here's the coverage on main:

ok  	vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vttablet/tabletmanager	22.534s	coverage: 23.6% of statements in vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtctl/workflow...
ok  	vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtctl/workflow	2.780s	coverage: 59.8% of statements in vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtctl/workflow...

and, here's the coverage on this branch:

ok  	vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vttablet/tabletmanager	23.378s	coverage: 23.4% of statements in vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtctl/workflow...
ok  	vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtctl/workflow	2.838s	coverage: 61.4% of statements in vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtctl/workflow...

I used this cmd to generate the coverage report because go/vt/vttablet/tabletmanager also contained tests for some workflow APIs:

go test ./go/vt/vttablet/tabletmanager ./go/vt/vtctl/workflow -coverpkg=vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtctl/workflow... -coverprofile=c.out

Copy link
Contributor

@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice work.

As a follow-up PR let's check the unit test coverage of workflows.go and add more unit tests if there are parts of the code in that file which are not covered.

@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps requested review from deepthi and a team November 19, 2024 18:56
limitations under the License.
*/

package workflow
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We have not done this in the past, but can you please write a top-level comment for what this file contains?
@rohit-nayak-ps you might need to help with that.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done. Please have a look.

Copy link
Contributor

@mattlord mattlord left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Just had the one nit that you can handle as you feel best. Thanks!

readReq := &tabletmanagerdatapb.ReadVReplicationWorkflowsRequest{}
if req.Workflow != "" {
readReq.IncludeWorkflows = []string{req.Workflow}
w := &workflow{
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit, but IMO a better name for this struct/type would be workflowReader or workflowFetcher. The term workflow[s] is already so overloaded today in the code.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done.

fetchLogsWG.Wait()
}

return maps.Values(workflowsMap), nil
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It might be worth sorting the slice here by keyspace/workflowName. Can be done later.

@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps merged commit 4675244 into vitessio:main Dec 6, 2024
97 of 98 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants