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

Sync Checksums: Refactor checksum logic to allow 'jetpack_sync_checksum_allowed_tables' filter to work with audits #40307

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 25, 2024

Conversation

fgiannar
Copy link
Contributor

@fgiannar fgiannar commented Nov 22, 2024

The purpose of this PR is to refactor the Checksum Audit functionality, Replicastore::checksum_all to allow dynamic support for additional checksums and provide a single source of truth for the supported ones.

So far, we were manually creating audit checksums for default Sync modules (tables), like eg posts and comments and explicitly checking the jetpack_table_checksum_force_enable_* filters we knew about, eg for woocommerce and woocommerce_hpos_orders modules.

However, this approach will not work if Sync package consumers want to add their own custom table support for checksums. Here's an example PR for the WooCommerce Analytics plugin.

Therefore, we are refactoring Replicastore::checksum_all to fetch all the supported ones dynamically by:

  • Introducing Table_Checksum::get_allowed_tables: A public static method that uses the jetpack_sync_checksum_allowed_tables filter under the hood, so that the allowed checksum tables become available to all consumers
  • Using the method above in Replicastore::checksum_all to fetch the allowed tables and iterate on those instead of hardcoding the tables

This way if a consumer adds checksum support for an additional custom table via the jetpack_sync_checksum_allowed_tables filter, Audit Checksums will take that table into account to both on remote sites and WPCOM.

Proposed changes:

  • Automattic\Jetpack\Sync\Replicastore\Table_Checksum: Introduce public static get_allowed_tables for fetching the allowed checksum tables via the jetpack_sync_checksum_allowed_tables filter.
  • Automattic\Jetpack\Sync\Replicastore: Refactor checksum_all to rely on Table_Checksum::get_allowed_tables for fetching the allowed checksum tables

Other information:

  • Have you written new tests for your changes, if applicable?
  • Have you checked the E2E test CI results, and verified that your changes do not break them?
  • Have you tested your changes on WordPress.com, if applicable (if so, you'll see a generated comment below with a script to run)?

Jetpack product discussion

pfKYZu-1Po-p2

Does this pull request change what data or activity we track or use?

No

Testing instructions:

  • D166997-code

Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for your PR!

When contributing to Jetpack, we have a few suggestions that can help us test and review your patch:

  • ✅ Include a description of your PR changes.
  • ✅ Add a "[Status]" label (In Progress, Needs Team Review, ...).
  • ✅ Add testing instructions.
  • ✅ Specify whether this PR includes any changes to data or privacy.
  • ✅ Add changelog entries to affected projects

This comment will be updated as you work on your PR and make changes. If you think that some of those checks are not needed for your PR, please explain why you think so. Thanks for cooperation 🤖


The e2e test report can be found here. Please note that it can take a few minutes after the e2e tests checks are complete for the report to be available.


Follow this PR Review Process:

  1. Ensure all required checks appearing at the bottom of this PR are passing.
  2. Choose a review path based on your changes:
    • A. Team Review: add the "[Status] Needs Team Review" label
      • For most changes, including minor cross-team impacts.
      • Example: Updating a team-specific component or a small change to a shared library.
    • B. Crew Review: add the "[Status] Needs Review" label
      • For significant changes to core functionality.
      • Example: Major updates to a shared library or complex features.
    • C. Both: Start with Team, then request Crew
      • For complex changes or when you need extra confidence.
      • Example: Refactor affecting multiple systems.
  3. Get at least one approval before merging.

Still unsure? Reach out in #jetpack-developers for guidance!

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 22, 2024

Are you an Automattician? Please test your changes on all WordPress.com environments to help mitigate accidental explosions.

  • To test on WoA, go to the Plugins menu on a WordPress.com Simple site. Click on the "Upload" button and follow the upgrade flow to be able to upload, install, and activate the Jetpack Beta plugin. Once the plugin is active, go to Jetpack > Jetpack Beta, select your plugin, and enable the update/sync-checksum branch.

    • For jetpack-mu-wpcom changes, also add define( 'JETPACK_MU_WPCOM_LOAD_VIA_BETA_PLUGIN', true ); to your wp-config.php file.
  • To test on Simple, run the following command on your sandbox:

    bin/jetpack-downloader test jetpack update/sync-checksum
    
    bin/jetpack-downloader test jetpack-mu-wpcom-plugin update/sync-checksum
    

Interested in more tips and information?

  • In your local development environment, use the jetpack rsync command to sync your changes to a WoA dev blog.
  • Read more about our development workflow here: PCYsg-eg0-p2
  • Figure out when your changes will be shipped to customers here: PCYsg-eg5-p2

Copy link
Contributor

@coder-karen coder-karen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍 Test-wise, this works well (I couldn't generate any fatals or errors following the testing steps).

@fgiannar fgiannar merged commit 3c72eef into trunk Nov 25, 2024
79 checks passed
@fgiannar fgiannar deleted the update/sync-checksum branch November 25, 2024 11:59
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.

2 participants