fix: The lock api does not call pageService's update method correctly #883
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve modifications to the Changes
Suggested reviewers
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
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![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
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
mockServer/src/services/app.js (3)
Line range hint
16-23: Add error handling and input validation to the lock method.The current implementation lacks several important safeguards:
- No error handling for the async operation
- No validation of required parameters
- No check for existing locks before updating
Consider implementing these improvements:
async lock(query) { + if (!query?.id || !query?.state) { + throw new Error('Missing required parameters: id and state') + } + if (!['occupy', 'release'].includes(query.state)) { + throw new Error('Invalid state value. Expected "occupy" or "release"') + } const { id, state } = query - const occupier = state === 'occupy' ? mockService.pageService.userInfo : null - await mockService.pageService.update(id, { occupier }) - return getResponseData({ - operate: 'success', - occupier - }) + try { + // Check current lock status + const currentPage = await mockService.pageService.findById(id) + if (state === 'occupy' && currentPage.occupier) { + throw new Error('Page is already locked by another user') + } + const occupier = state === 'occupy' ? mockService.pageService.userInfo : null + await mockService.pageService.update(id, { occupier }) + return getResponseData({ + operate: 'success', + occupier + }) + } catch (error) { + return getResponseData({ + operate: 'error', + message: error.message + }, 400) + } }
Line range hint
16-23: Add unit tests for the lock functionality.As noted in the PR objectives, tests haven't been added for these changes. The lock functionality is critical and should be thoroughly tested.
Would you like me to help generate unit tests covering the following scenarios?
- Successful lock/unlock operations
- Error handling for invalid inputs
- Concurrent lock attempts
- Edge cases with missing or invalid data
18-19: Consider adding logging for lock/unlock operations.For better debugging and audit trails, it would be helpful to log these operations.
+ const logger = mockService.logger || console const occupier = state === 'occupy' ? mockService.pageService.userInfo : null + logger.info(`${state} operation requested for page ${id} by user ${mockService.pageService.userInfo?.id}`) await mockService.pageService.update(id, { occupier })
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- mockServer/src/services/app.js (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
mockServer/src/services/app.js (1)
13-13: Verify the consistency of service imports across the codebase.The change from direct
pageServiceimport to usingmockServicesuggests an architectural shift. Let's ensure this pattern is consistently applied across the codebase.
English | 简体中文
PR
PR Checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
PR Type
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Background and solution
What is the current behavior?
Issue Number: #882
What is the new behavior?
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Other information
Summary by CodeRabbit