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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fix: remove max_items constraint from repeated validation rule #1853

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 18, 2024
Merged

fix: remove max_items constraint from repeated validation rule #1853

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 18, 2024
+2,154 −2,179

Conversation

tolgaOzen
Copy link
Member

@tolgaOzen tolgaOzen commented Dec 18, 2024 •
edited by coderabbitai bot
Loading

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Updated API version to v1.2.4 across documentation and specifications.
    • Enhanced flexibility in data submissions by removing maximum item constraints for Tuples and Attributes in requests.

  • Bug Fixes

    • Adjusted validation logic to ensure at least one item is present in Tuples fields without imposing upper limits.

@coderabbitai coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Walkthrough

This pull request focuses on updating the version number from "v1.2.3" to "v1.2.4" across multiple files in the Permify project. The changes are primarily version increments in documentation and configuration files, including API reference documents, OpenAPI specifications, and internal version tracking. The modifications do not introduce any functional changes to the API or service implementation.

Changes

File Change Summary
docs/api-reference/apidocs.swagger.json Version updated from "v1.2.3" to "v1.2.4"
docs/api-reference/openapiv2/apidocs.swagger.json Version updated from "v1.2.3" to "v1.2.4"
internal/info.go Version constant updated from "v1.2.3" to "v1.2.4"
proto/base/v1/openapi.proto Version updated from "v1.2.3" to "v1.2.4"
pkg/pb/base/v1/service.pb.validate.go Removed maximum length validation for Tuples and Attributes in DataWriteRequest and Tuples in RelationshipWriteRequest
proto/base/v1/service.proto Removed max_items constraints for tuples and attributes fields

Possibly related PRs

Poem

🐰 Hop, hop, version's on the rise,
From v1.2.3 to v1.2.4, no surprise!
Validation limits gently fade away,
Flexibility dancing in the API's ballet.
A rabbit's leap of code, so light and free! 🚀

Tip

CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command @coderabbitai generate docstrings to have CodeRabbit automatically generate docstrings for your pull request. We would love to hear your feedback on Discord.

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.

CodeRabbit Configuration 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.

coderabbitai[bot]
coderabbitai bot reviewed Dec 18, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@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

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
pkg/pb/base/v1/service.pb.validate.go (1)

5700-5703: LGTM! Validation changes align with PR objectives.

The changes correctly maintain the minimum validation of 1 tuple while removing the maximum limit constraint, as intended by the PR.

Consider the performance implications of removing the upper limit on tuples. While this provides more flexibility, you may want to consider:

  • Adding rate limiting or pagination if not already present
  • Monitoring system resource usage with larger tuple sets
  • Documenting any practical limits based on system capabilities
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 21106c6 and deb82b4.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
  • pkg/pb/base/v1/openapi.pb.go is excluded by !**/*.pb.go
  • pkg/pb/base/v1/service.pb.go is excluded by !**/*.pb.go
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
  • docs/api-reference/apidocs.swagger.json (1 hunks)
  • docs/api-reference/openapiv2/apidocs.swagger.json (1 hunks)
  • internal/info.go (1 hunks)
  • pkg/pb/base/v1/service.pb.validate.go (1 hunks)
  • proto/base/v1/openapi.proto (1 hunks)
  • proto/base/v1/service.proto (0 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
  • proto/base/v1/service.proto
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (4)
  • internal/info.go
  • proto/base/v1/openapi.proto
  • docs/api-reference/openapiv2/apidocs.swagger.json
  • docs/api-reference/apidocs.swagger.json

@tolgaOzen tolgaOzen merged commit 1fc2408 into master Dec 18, 2024
9 checks passed
@tolgaOzen tolgaOzen deleted the server/validation branch December 18, 2024 12:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@coderabbitai coderabbitai[bot] coderabbitai[bot] left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@tolgaOzen