[ISSUE #2143]♻️Refactor QueryDataVersionResponseHeader with derive marco RequestHeaderCodec #2144
Conversation
…rco RequestHeaderCodec
WalkthroughThe pull request focuses on refactoring the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
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
|
rocketmq-rust-bot
requested review from
rocketmq-rust-bot,
SpaceXCN and
TeslaRustor
|
🔊@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💥. |
rocketmq-rust-bot
added
AI review first
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/header/namesrv/query_data_version_header.rs (1)
66-118: Great test coverage! Consider adding edge cases.The test suite is comprehensive, covering object construction, serialization, and deserialization for both request and response headers.
Consider adding these test cases:
- Deserialization with missing fields
- Deserialization with extra fields
- Empty/null string handling for request header fields
Example addition:
#[test] fn query_data_version_request_header_missing_fields() { let json = r#"{"brokerName":"broker1","clusterName":"cluster1"}"#; let result: Result<QueryDataVersionRequestHeader, _> = serde_json::from_str(json); assert!(result.is_err()); } #[test] fn query_data_version_request_header_extra_fields() { let json = r#"{"brokerName":"broker1","brokerAddr":"127.0.0.1","clusterName":"cluster1","brokerId":1,"extra":"field"}"#; let result: QueryDataVersionRequestHeader = serde_json::from_str(json).unwrap(); assert_eq!(result.broker_name, CheetahString::from("broker1")); }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/header/namesrv/query_data_version_header.rs(1 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: build
- GitHub Check: build (ubuntu-latest, nightly)
- GitHub Check: test
- GitHub Check: build (ubuntu-latest, stable)
- GitHub Check: auto-approve
🔇 Additional comments (1)
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/header/namesrv/query_data_version_header.rs (1)
55-57: Verify backward compatibility after trait removal.Good refactoring using the
RequestHeaderCodecderive macro instead of manual trait implementation. However, sinceCommandCustomHeadertrait implementation was removed, we should verify this isn't a breaking change for existing consumers.Let's check for any direct usage of the removed trait:
✅ Verification successful
Refactoring is safe - trait implementation preserved through derive macro
The removal of manual
CommandCustomHeaderimplementation is safe because:
- The
RequestHeaderCodecderive macro automatically implements theCommandCustomHeadertrait with equivalent functionality- This follows the established pattern used throughout the codebase for request/response headers
- No direct usage of this type's manual trait implementation was found that would be broken by this change
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for any direct usage of CommandCustomHeader with QueryDataVersionResponseHeader rg -l "CommandCustomHeader.*QueryDataVersionResponseHeader|QueryDataVersionResponseHeader.*CommandCustomHeader" # Search for any type constraints or where clauses that might expect CommandCustomHeader rg "where.*CommandCustomHeader|CommandCustomHeader.*where"Length of output: 174
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Find RequestHeaderCodec definition and implementation ast-grep --pattern 'trait RequestHeaderCodec {$$$}' ast-grep --pattern 'impl RequestHeaderCodec for $_ {$$$}' # Find CommandCustomHeader trait definition and its requirements ast-grep --pattern 'trait CommandCustomHeader {$$$}' # Find derive macro definition ast-grep --pattern '#[derive(RequestHeaderCodec)]' # Broader search for any CommandCustomHeader usage rg "CommandCustomHeader" -A 2 -B 2Length of output: 62949
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2144 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 28.27% 28.34% +0.06%
==========================================
Files 497 497
Lines 70979 71001 +22
==========================================
+ Hits 20070 20123 +53
+ Misses 50909 50878 -31 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
rocketmq-rust-bot
added
approved
Which Issue(s) This PR Fixes(Closes)
Fixes #2143
Brief Description
How Did You Test This Change?
Summary by CodeRabbit
Refactor
QueryDataVersionResponseHeaderCommandCustomHeadertrait implementationTests