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

[ISSUE #1511]♻️Refactor NotifyMinBrokerIdChangeRequestHeader with derive marco RequestHeaderCodec #2316

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 18, 2025

Conversation

mxsm
Copy link
Owner

@mxsm mxsm commented Jan 18, 2025

Which Issue(s) This PR Fixes(Closes)

Fixes #1511

Brief Description

How Did You Test This Change?

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor
    • Updated struct derivation with RequestHeaderCodec
    • Removed FromMap and CommandCustomHeader trait implementations
  • Tests
    • Added test cases for struct initialization and default constructor

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 18, 2025

Walkthrough

The pull request focuses on refactoring the NotifyMinBrokerIdChangeRequestHeader struct in the RocketMQ Rust implementation. The primary change involves adding the RequestHeaderCodec derive macro to the struct, which simplifies the header encoding and decoding process. The implementation removes the FromMap trait and associated constants, streamlining the struct's interface and potentially improving its maintainability.

Changes

File Change Summary
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/header/namesrv/brokerid_change_request_header.rs - Added RequestHeaderCodec derive macro to struct
- Removed FromMap trait implementation
- Removed constants for field names
- Added new test cases for struct initialization

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Refactor NotifyMinBrokerIdChangeRequestHeader with RequestHeaderCodec derive macro [#1511]
Ensure no new bugs are introduced
Update unit tests

Possibly related issues

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

refactor♻️, enhancement⚡️, auto merge, ready to review, waiting-review, AI review first

Suggested reviewers

  • SpaceXCN
  • TeslaRustor
  • rocketmq-rust-bot

Poem

🐰 A Rabbit's Refactor Rhyme 🔧

In lines of code, a struct takes flight,
With RequestHeaderCodec shining bright
Old traits fade, new patterns emerge
Simplicity and speed now converge
Rust refactoring, oh what a delight! 🚀


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:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • 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 gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @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 using 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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

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.

@rocketmq-rust-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

🔊@mxsm 🚀Thanks for your contribution🎉!

💡CodeRabbit(AI) will review your code first🔥!

Note

🚨The code review suggestions from CodeRabbit are to be used as a reference only, and the PR submitter can decide whether to make changes based on their own judgment. Ultimately, the project management personnel will conduct the final code review💥.

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: 0

🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/header/namesrv/brokerid_change_request_header.rs (1)

RequestHeaderCodec usage needs standardization across request headers

The struct implementation in brokerid_change_request_header.rs follows the correct pattern with RequestHeaderCodec. However, there are inconsistencies across the codebase where some request header structs are missing the RequestHeaderCodec derive macro.

  • Consider standardizing the derive macro usage across all request header structs in future refactoring
  • Ensure new request headers consistently use the RequestHeaderCodec pattern
🔗 Analysis chain

Line range hint 23-38: LGTM! RequestHeaderCodec derive macro added correctly.

The struct definition is well-structured with:

  • Appropriate use of Option for optional fields
  • Consistent serde rename attributes for Java compatibility
  • RequestHeaderCodec derive macro replacing manual FromMap implementation

Let's verify the RequestHeaderCodec macro implementation:

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check if RequestHeaderCodec is consistently used across similar request headers
ast-grep --pattern 'struct $name:ident {
  $$$
}' -l rust | xargs rg "RequestHeaderCodec" -l | wc -l

Length of output: 554


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Find all request header structs and check RequestHeaderCodec usage
echo "=== Request Header Structs ==="
rg "struct \w+RequestHeader" -B 1 --no-filename | sort | uniq

echo -e "\n=== Missing RequestHeaderCodec ==="
# Find structs without RequestHeaderCodec in the previous line
rg "struct \w+RequestHeader" -B 1 --no-filename | grep -B 1 "struct" | grep -v "RequestHeaderCodec" | grep -v "struct" || echo "None found"

Length of output: 5489

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/header/namesrv/brokerid_change_request_header.rs (1)

59-99: Add tests for RequestHeaderCodec functionality.

The current tests cover constructor and default implementation well. However, consider adding tests for the RequestHeaderCodec functionality to ensure proper serialization/deserialization behavior.

Here's a suggested test addition:

#[test]
fn test_request_header_codec() {
    let header = NotifyMinBrokerIdChangeRequestHeader::new(
        Some(1),
        Some(CheetahString::from("broker1")),
        Some(CheetahString::from("addr1")),
        Some(CheetahString::from("addr2")),
        Some(CheetahString::from("addr3")),
    );
    
    // Test serialization to HashMap
    let map = header.to_map();
    assert_eq!(map.get("minBrokerId").unwrap(), "1");
    assert_eq!(map.get("brokerName").unwrap(), "broker1");
    
    // Test deserialization from HashMap
    let decoded = NotifyMinBrokerIdChangeRequestHeader::from_map(&map).unwrap();
    assert_eq!(decoded.min_broker_id, header.min_broker_id);
    assert_eq!(decoded.broker_name, header.broker_name);
}
📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between eb6d6b1 and 465767f.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/header/namesrv/brokerid_change_request_header.rs (2 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (9)
  • GitHub Check: build (windows-latest, nightly)
  • GitHub Check: build (windows-latest, stable)
  • GitHub Check: build (macos-latest, nightly)
  • GitHub Check: build (macos-latest, stable)
  • GitHub Check: test
  • GitHub Check: build
  • GitHub Check: build (ubuntu-latest, nightly)
  • GitHub Check: auto-approve
  • GitHub Check: build (ubuntu-latest, stable)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/header/namesrv/brokerid_change_request_header.rs (2)

19-19: LGTM! Import added for RequestHeaderCodec derive macro.

The import is correctly added to support the new derive macro usage.


Line range hint 40-57: LGTM! Constructor implementation is clean and well-structured.

The new method provides a clear way to construct the header with all optional fields. The removal of the FromMap trait implementation is appropriate as RequestHeaderCodec now handles the serialization/deserialization.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 18, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.42857% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 28.28%. Comparing base (eb6d6b1) to head (465767f).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...l/header/namesrv/brokerid_change_request_header.rs 96.42% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2316      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   28.20%   28.28%   +0.08%     
==========================================
  Files         504      504              
  Lines       72470    72422      -48     
==========================================
+ Hits        20440    20485      +45     
+ Misses      52030    51937      -93     

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

Copy link
Collaborator

@rocketmq-rust-bot rocketmq-rust-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@rocketmq-rust-bot rocketmq-rust-bot merged commit da8ed2b into main Jan 18, 2025
27 checks passed
@rocketmq-rust-bot rocketmq-rust-bot added approved PR has approved and removed ready to review waiting-review waiting review this PR labels Jan 18, 2025
@mxsm mxsm deleted the refactor-1511 branch January 18, 2025 10:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
AI review first Ai review pr first approved PR has approved auto merge Difficulty level/Easy Easy ISSUE refactor♻️ refactor code
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Refactor♻️]Refactor NotifyMinBrokerIdChangeRequestHeader with derive marco RequestHeaderCodec
3 participants