Feat/be/maintenance window module tests #1127
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
![llamapreview[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1023541?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Auto Pull Request Review from LlamaPReview
1. Overview
1.1 PR Summary
- Business value and requirements alignment: The PR aims to add tests for the MaintenanceWindow module and fix a missing
awaitin theeditMaintenanceWindowByIdfunction. This enhances test coverage and ensures the reliability of the MaintenanceWindow module, which is crucial for system maintenance planning. - Key components modified: The
maintenanceWindowModule.jsand a new test filemaintenanceWindowModule.test.js. - Impact assessment: Minimal cross-component impact; the changes are isolated to the MaintenanceWindow module and its tests.
- System dependencies and integration impacts: No impact on existing integration points.
1.2 Architecture Changes
- System design modifications: None. The changes are localized to the MaintenanceWindow module.
- Component interactions: None. The existing interactions with the module remain unchanged.
- Integration points: None. The integration points are not affected by these changes.
2. Detailed Technical Analysis
2.1 Code Logic Deep-Dive
Core Logic Changes
File Path: Server/db/mongo/modules/maintenanceWindowModule.js
Function: editMaintenanceWindowById
- Submitted PR Code:
const editMaintenanceWindowById = async (maintenanceWindowId, maintenanceWindowData) => { try { - const editedMaintenanceWindow = MaintenanceWindow.findByIdAndUpdate( + const editedMaintenanceWindow = await MaintenanceWindow.findByIdAndUpdate( maintenanceWindowId, maintenanceWindowData, { new: true } ); return editedMaintenanceWindow; } catch (error) { error.service = SERVICE_NAME; error.method = "editMaintenanceWindowById"; throw error; } };
- Analysis:
- Current logic and potential issues: The previous code was missing an
awaitkeyword, which could lead to asynchronous issues. - Edge cases and error handling: The error handling is well-implemented, capturing and throwing the error with additional context.
- Cross-component impact: None.
- Business logic considerations: None.
- Current logic and potential issues: The previous code was missing an
- LlamaPReview Suggested Improvements:
const editMaintenanceWindowById = async (maintenanceWindowId, maintenanceWindowData) => { try { const editedMaintenanceWindow = await MaintenanceWindow.findByIdAndUpdate( maintenanceWindowId, maintenanceWindowData, { new: true } ); return editedMaintenanceWindow; } catch (error) { console.error(`Error in editMaintenanceWindowById: ${error.message}`); error.service = SERVICE_NAME; error.method = "editMaintenanceWindowById"; throw error; } };
- Improvement rationale:
- Technical benefits: Ensures that the asynchronous operation completes before proceeding.
- Business value: Enhances the reliability of maintenance window edits.
- Risk assessment: Low risk; the change is a straightforward fix.
2.2 Implementation Quality
-
Code Structure:
- Organization and modularity: The code is well-organized and modular.
- Design pattern adherence: Follows standard asynchronous patterns.
- Reusability aspects: The functions are reusable within the module.
- Maintainability factors: The code is easy to read and understand.
-
Error Handling:
- Exception scenarios coverage: Comprehensive error handling with contextual information.
- Recovery mechanisms: Errors are thrown with additional context, aiding in debugging.
- Logging and monitoring: No logging implemented; consider adding logging for better monitoring.
- User experience impact: Minimal; errors are handled internally.
-
Performance Considerations:
- Resource utilization: Efficient use of resources.
- Scalability aspects: The changes do not impact scalability.
- Bottleneck analysis: No bottlenecks identified.
- Optimization opportunities: None identified.
3. Critical Findings
3.1 Potential Issues
-
🔴 Critical Issues
- Issue description: No critical issues identified.
- Impact: None.
- Recommendation: None required.
-
🟡 Warnings
- Warning description: Add logging for better monitoring and debugging.
- Potential risks:
- Performance implications: None.
- Maintenance overhead: Slightly increased due to additional logging.
- Future scalability: None.
- Suggested improvements:
- Implementation approach: Add logging statements in the catch blocks.
- Migration strategy: Simple addition of logging statements.
- Testing considerations: Ensure logs are generated as expected.
3.2 Code Quality Concerns
- Maintainability aspects: The code is well-organized and modular, but lacks inline comments for better readability.
- Readability issues: None.
- Performance bottlenecks: None identified.
4. Security Assessment
4.1 Security Considerations
- Authentication/Authorization impacts: None.
- Data handling concerns: None.
- Input validation: Inputs are validated through MongoDB schema.
- Security best practices: Compliant with existing security standards.
4.2 Vulnerability Analysis
- Potential security risks: None identified.
- Mitigation strategies: None required.
- Security testing requirements: None identified.
5. Testing Strategy
5.1 Test Coverage
- Unit test requirements: Comprehensive unit tests for all functions.
- Integration test scenarios: Not applicable for this PR.
- Edge case validation: All edge cases are validated in the tests.
5.2 Test Recommendations
Suggested Test Cases
// Example test case for logging
describe("editMaintenanceWindowById with logging", () => {
it("should log an error if the update fails", async () => {
const err = new Error("test error");
maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.rejects(err);
const consoleErrorSpy = sinon.spy(console, "error");
try {
await editMaintenanceWindowById(mockMaintenanceWindow.id, mockMaintenanceWindow);
} catch (error) {
expect(consoleErrorSpy.calledWith(`Error in editMaintenanceWindowById: ${err.message}`)).to.be.true;
}
consoleErrorSpy.restore();
});
});- Coverage improvements: Ensure logs are generated as expected.
- Performance testing needs: Not applicable for this PR.
6. Documentation & Maintenance
- Documentation updates needed: Add inline comments to describe the function's purpose.
- Long-term maintenance considerations: Easy to maintain due to modular and well-organized code.
- Technical debt and monitoring requirements: Low technical debt; consider adding logging for better monitoring.
7. Deployment & Operations
- Deployment impact and strategy: Minimal. The changes are isolated to the MaintenanceWindow module.
- Key operational considerations: None.
8. Summary & Recommendations
8.1 Key Action Items
- Critical changes required: None identified.
- Important improvements suggested:
- Add logging for better monitoring and debugging.
- Best practices to implement:
- Add inline comments to describe the purpose of each function.
- Cross-cutting concerns to address:
- Ensure proper logging and comments for future maintainability.
8.2 Future Considerations
- Technical evolution path: Continue to enhance test coverage and reliability of the system.
- Business capability evolution: Ensure the MaintenanceWindow module remains robust and reliable.
- System integration impacts: Minimal impact on existing integration points.
By addressing the identified improvements, the PR will not only meet its current objectives but also enhance the overall quality and maintainability of the MaintenanceWindow module.
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve modifications to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
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
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (7)
Server/db/mongo/modules/maintenanceWindowModule.js (3)
Line range hint
206-210: Yo dawg, thatawaitaddition is straight fire! 🔥The addition of the
awaitkeyword fixes a critical issue that could have caused inconsistent behavior and race conditions. This change ensures we properly wait for the database operation to complete.Consider adding parameter validation to prevent potential issues:
const editMaintenanceWindowById = async (maintenanceWindowId, maintenanceWindowData) => { try { + if (!maintenanceWindowId) { + throw new Error('maintenanceWindowId is required'); + } + if (!maintenanceWindowData || typeof maintenanceWindowData !== 'object') { + throw new Error('maintenanceWindowData must be a valid object'); + } const editedMaintenanceWindow = await MaintenanceWindow.findByIdAndUpdate(
Line range hint
205-217: Mom's spaghetti says we need some documentation! 📝Unlike other functions in this module,
editMaintenanceWindowByIdis missing JSDoc documentation. Let's keep it consistent with the rest of the codebase.Add this documentation above the function:
/** * Asynchronously updates a MaintenanceWindow document by its ID. * @async * @function editMaintenanceWindowById * @param {mongoose.Schema.Types.ObjectId} maintenanceWindowId - The ID of the MaintenanceWindow document to update. * @param {Object} maintenanceWindowData - The updated data for the MaintenanceWindow document. * @returns {Promise<MaintenanceWindow>} The updated MaintenanceWindow document. * @throws {Error} If there is an error updating the document. * @example * editMaintenanceWindowById('maintenanceWindowId', { active: false }) * .then(maintenanceWindow => console.log(maintenanceWindow)) * .catch(error => console.error(error)); */
Line range hint
1-217: Knees weak, arms heavy, but this module's structure is steady! 💪The module demonstrates solid practices:
- Consistent error handling across all functions
- Clean MongoDB operations with proper async/await usage
- Well-organized exports
- Comprehensive documentation (except for the noted function)
Consider adding input sanitization middleware or a validation layer to ensure data consistency before it reaches these database operations.
Server/tests/db/maintenanceWindowModule.test.js (4)
15-21: Yo dawg, let's beef up that mock data!The mock maintenance window could use more realistic test data. Consider adding:
teamId(used in tests but missing from mock)userId(used in tests but missing from mock)name(used in sorting tests)const mockMaintenanceWindow = { + id: "mw_123", monitorId: "123", + teamId: "team_123", + userId: "user_123", + name: "Scheduled Maintenance", active: true, oneTime: true, start: 1, end: 20000, };
178-195: There's vomit on his sweater already - we're missing some test cases!Consider adding these test cases:
- Empty result set
- Multiple maintenance windows
- Invalid monitorId format
+it("should return empty array when no maintenance windows exist", async () => { + maintenanceWindowFindStub.resolves([]); + const result = await getMaintenanceWindowsByMonitorId("non_existent_monitor"); + expect(result).to.deep.equal([]); +}); +it("should handle multiple maintenance windows", async () => { + const multipleWindows = [mockMaintenanceWindow, {...mockMaintenanceWindow, id: "mw_456"}]; + maintenanceWindowFindStub.resolves(multipleWindows); + const result = await getMaintenanceWindowsByMonitorId(mockMaintenanceWindow.monitorId); + expect(result).to.have.length(2); +});
65-73: Lose yourself in better error handling!The error handling tests should be more specific about different types of errors:
- Database connection errors
- Validation errors
- Permission errors
Example improvement:
-it("should handle an error", async () => { +it("should handle database connection error", async () => { - const err = new Error("test error"); + const err = new Error("MongoNetworkError: connection failed"); maintenanceWindowSaveStub.rejects(err); try { await createMaintenanceWindow(mockMaintenanceWindow); + expect.fail("Should have thrown an error"); } catch (error) { expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); + expect(error.message).to.include("MongoNetworkError"); } }); +it("should handle validation error", async () => { + const err = new Error("ValidationError: start date must be before end date"); + maintenanceWindowSaveStub.rejects(err); + try { + await createMaintenanceWindow({ ...mockMaintenanceWindow, start: 30000, end: 1 }); + expect.fail("Should have thrown an error"); + } catch (error) { + expect(error.message).to.include("ValidationError"); + } +});Also applies to: 81-89, 168-176, 186-194, 202-210, 221-229, 238-246, 257-265
14-31: Clean up that spaghetti code with test utilities!Consider extracting common test utilities:
// testUtils.js export const createMockMaintenanceWindow = (overrides = {}) => ({ id: "mw_123", monitorId: "123", teamId: "team_123", userId: "user_123", name: "Scheduled Maintenance", active: true, oneTime: true, start: 1, end: 20000, ...overrides }); export const setupStubs = () => ({ save: sinon.stub(MaintenanceWindow.prototype, "save"), findById: sinon.stub(MaintenanceWindow, "findById"), // ... other stubs });
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
Server/db/mongo/modules/maintenanceWindowModule.js(1 hunks)Server/tests/db/maintenanceWindowModule.test.js(1 hunks)
Comment on lines
+108
to
+118
| it("should return a list of maintenance windows and count", async () => { | ||
| maintenanceWindowCountDocumentsStub.resolves(1); | ||
| const result = await getMaintenanceWindowsByTeamId( | ||
| mockMaintenanceWindow.teamId, | ||
| query | ||
| ); | ||
| expect(result).to.deep.equal({ | ||
| maintenanceWindows: mockMaintenanceWindows, | ||
| maintenanceWindowCount: 1, | ||
| }); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Knees weak, arms heavy - we need to verify those query params!
The test should explicitly verify the query parameters passed to the stubs:
it("should return a list of maintenance windows and count", async () => {
maintenanceWindowCountDocumentsStub.resolves(1);
const result = await getMaintenanceWindowsByTeamId(
mockMaintenanceWindow.teamId,
query
);
+ expect(maintenanceWindowFindStub.calledWith({ teamId: mockMaintenanceWindow.teamId, active: true })).to.be.true;
+ expect(maintenanceWindowCountDocumentsStub.calledWith({ teamId: mockMaintenanceWindow.teamId, active: true })).to.be.true;
expect(result).to.deep.equal({
maintenanceWindows: mockMaintenanceWindows,
maintenanceWindowCount: 1,
});
});Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
Comment on lines
+58
to
+74
| describe("createMaintenanceWindow", () => { | ||
| it("should save a new maintenance window", async () => { | ||
| maintenanceWindowSaveStub.resolves(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| const result = await createMaintenanceWindow(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| expect(result).to.deep.equal(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | ||
| const err = new Error("test error"); | ||
| maintenanceWindowSaveStub.rejects(err); | ||
| try { | ||
| await createMaintenanceWindow(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Mom's spaghetti says we need more assertions!
The test suite should verify that the stub was called with the correct arguments:
it("should save a new maintenance window", async () => {
maintenanceWindowSaveStub.resolves(mockMaintenanceWindow);
const result = await createMaintenanceWindow(mockMaintenanceWindow);
expect(result).to.deep.equal(mockMaintenanceWindow);
+ expect(maintenanceWindowSaveStub.calledOnce).to.be.true;
+ expect(maintenanceWindowSaveStub.calledWith()).to.be.true;
});Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
Comment on lines
+248
to
+266
| describe("editMaintenanceWindowById", () => { | ||
| it("should return the updated maintenance window", async () => { | ||
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.resolves(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| const result = await editMaintenanceWindowById( | ||
| mockMaintenanceWindow.id, | ||
| mockMaintenanceWindow | ||
| ); | ||
| expect(result).to.deep.equal(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| }); | ||
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | ||
| const err = new Error("test error"); | ||
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.rejects(err); | ||
| try { | ||
| await editMaintenanceWindowById(mockMaintenanceWindow.id, mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Palms are sweaty - we need to validate those update options!
The test should verify:
- The update options (e.g.,
{ new: true }) - Partial updates
- Non-existent ID handling
it("should return the updated maintenance window", async () => {
maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.resolves(mockMaintenanceWindow);
const result = await editMaintenanceWindowById(
mockMaintenanceWindow.id,
mockMaintenanceWindow
);
+ expect(maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.calledWith(
+ mockMaintenanceWindow.id,
+ mockMaintenanceWindow,
+ { new: true }
+ )).to.be.true;
expect(result).to.deep.equal(mockMaintenanceWindow);
});
+it("should handle non-existent maintenance window", async () => {
+ maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.resolves(null);
+ const result = await editMaintenanceWindowById("non_existent_id", mockMaintenanceWindow);
+ expect(result).to.be.null;
+});
+it("should handle partial updates", async () => {
+ const partialUpdate = { active: false };
+ const updatedWindow = { ...mockMaintenanceWindow, ...partialUpdate };
+ maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.resolves(updatedWindow);
+ const result = await editMaintenanceWindowById(mockMaintenanceWindow.id, partialUpdate);
+ expect(result).to.deep.equal(updatedWindow);
+});📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
Suggested change
| describe("editMaintenanceWindowById", () => { | |
| it("should return the updated maintenance window", async () => { | |
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.resolves(mockMaintenanceWindow); | |
| const result = await editMaintenanceWindowById( | |
| mockMaintenanceWindow.id, | |
| mockMaintenanceWindow | |
| ); | |
| expect(result).to.deep.equal(mockMaintenanceWindow); | |
| }); | |
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | |
| const err = new Error("test error"); | |
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.rejects(err); | |
| try { | |
| await editMaintenanceWindowById(mockMaintenanceWindow.id, mockMaintenanceWindow); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | |
| } | |
| }); | |
| }); | |
| describe("editMaintenanceWindowById", () => { | |
| it("should return the updated maintenance window", async () => { | |
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.resolves(mockMaintenanceWindow); | |
| const result = await editMaintenanceWindowById( | |
| mockMaintenanceWindow.id, | |
| mockMaintenanceWindow | |
| ); | |
| expect(maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.calledWith( | |
| mockMaintenanceWindow.id, | |
| mockMaintenanceWindow, | |
| { new: true } | |
| )).to.be.true; | |
| expect(result).to.deep.equal(mockMaintenanceWindow); | |
| }); | |
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | |
| const err = new Error("test error"); | |
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.rejects(err); | |
| try { | |
| await editMaintenanceWindowById(mockMaintenanceWindow.id, mockMaintenanceWindow); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | |
| } | |
| }); | |
| it("should handle non-existent maintenance window", async () => { | |
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.resolves(null); | |
| const result = await editMaintenanceWindowById("non_existent_id", mockMaintenanceWindow); | |
| expect(result).to.be.null; | |
| }); | |
| it("should handle partial updates", async () => { | |
| const partialUpdate = { active: false }; | |
| const updatedWindow = { ...mockMaintenanceWindow, ...partialUpdate }; | |
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.resolves(updatedWindow); | |
| const result = await editMaintenanceWindowById(mockMaintenanceWindow.id, partialUpdate); | |
| expect(result).to.deep.equal(updatedWindow); | |
| }); | |
| }); |
Comment on lines
+1
to
+267
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | ||
| const err = new Error("test error"); | ||
| maintenanceWindowCountDocumentsStub.rejects(err); | ||
| try { | ||
| await getMaintenanceWindowsByTeamId(mockMaintenanceWindow.teamId, query); | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
| describe("getMaintenanceWindowsByMonitorId", () => { | ||
| it("should return a list of maintenance windows", async () => { | ||
| maintenanceWindowFindStub.resolves(mockMaintenanceWindows); | ||
| const result = await getMaintenanceWindowsByMonitorId( | ||
| mockMaintenanceWindow.monitorId | ||
| ); | ||
| expect(result).to.deep.equal(mockMaintenanceWindows); | ||
| }); | ||
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | ||
| const err = new Error("test error"); | ||
| maintenanceWindowFindStub.rejects(err); | ||
| try { | ||
| await getMaintenanceWindowsByMonitorId(mockMaintenanceWindow.monitorId); | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
| describe("deleteMaintenanceWindowById", () => { | ||
| it("should delete a maintenance window", async () => { | ||
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndDeleteStub.resolves(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| const result = await deleteMaintenanceWindowById(mockMaintenanceWindow.id); | ||
| expect(result).to.deep.equal(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| }); | ||
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | ||
| const err = new Error("test error"); | ||
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndDeleteStub.rejects(err); | ||
| try { | ||
| await deleteMaintenanceWindowById(mockMaintenanceWindow.id); | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| describe("deleteMaintenanceWindowByMonitorId", () => { | ||
| it("should return the number of documents deleted", async () => { | ||
| maintenanceWindowDeleteManyStub.resolves({ deletedCount: 1 }); | ||
| const result = await deleteMaintenanceWindowByMonitorId( | ||
| mockMaintenanceWindow.monitorId | ||
| ); | ||
| expect(result).to.deep.equal({ deletedCount: 1 }); | ||
| }); | ||
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | ||
| const err = new Error("test error"); | ||
| maintenanceWindowDeleteManyStub.rejects(err); | ||
| try { | ||
| await deleteMaintenanceWindowByMonitorId(mockMaintenanceWindow.monitorId); | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| describe("deleteMaintenanceWindowByUserId", () => { | ||
| it("should return the number of documents deleted", async () => { | ||
| maintenanceWindowDeleteManyStub.resolves({ deletedCount: 1 }); | ||
| const result = await deleteMaintenanceWindowByUserId(mockMaintenanceWindow.userId); | ||
| expect(result).to.deep.equal({ deletedCount: 1 }); | ||
| }); | ||
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | ||
| const err = new Error("test error"); | ||
| maintenanceWindowDeleteManyStub.rejects(err); | ||
| try { | ||
| await deleteMaintenanceWindowByUserId(mockMaintenanceWindow.userId); | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
| describe("editMaintenanceWindowById", () => { | ||
| it("should return the updated maintenance window", async () => { | ||
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.resolves(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| const result = await editMaintenanceWindowById( | ||
| mockMaintenanceWindow.id, | ||
| mockMaintenanceWindow | ||
| ); | ||
| expect(result).to.deep.equal(mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| }); | ||
| it("should handle an error", async () => { | ||
| const err = new Error("test error"); | ||
| maintenanceWindowFindByIdAndUpdateStub.rejects(err); | ||
| try { | ||
| await editMaintenanceWindowById(mockMaintenanceWindow.id, mockMaintenanceWindow); | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| expect(error).to.deep.equal(err); | ||
| } | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Yo, these tests are fire, but they could use some coverage swagger! 🔥
The test suite is solid with good error handling and edge cases, but there's no test coverage configuration in sight. Consider adding:
- Create a
jest.config.jsin the root directory with coverage settings:
module.exports = {
collectCoverage: true,
coverageReporters: ['text', 'lcov'],
collectCoverageFrom: [
'Server/db/mongo/modules/*.js'
],
coverageThreshold: {
global: {
branches: 80,
functions: 80,
lines: 80,
statements: 80
}
}
}- Add a coverage script to
package.json:
{
"scripts": {
"test:coverage": "jest --coverage"
}
}🔗 Analysis chain
He's nervous, but on the surface the tests look calm and ready!
Consider adding test coverage configuration:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if Jest configuration exists
if [ -f "jest.config.js" ]; then
echo "Jest config found. Add coverage configuration:"
cat << 'EOF'
module.exports = {
collectCoverage: true,
coverageReporters: ['text', 'lcov'],
collectCoverageFrom: [
'Server/db/mongo/modules/maintenanceWindowModule.js'
],
coverageThreshold: {
global: {
branches: 80,
functions: 80,
lines: 80,
statements: 80
}
}
}
EOF
else
echo "No Jest config found. Consider adding one for coverage reporting."
fi
Length of output: 168
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check if there are any test configuration files in the repository
fd -e config.js -e config.json -e config.ts
# Also check package.json for test configuration
if [ -f "package.json" ]; then
echo "=== Package.json Jest Config ==="
cat package.json | jq '.jest'
fi
# Check if there's any coverage reporting in existing test commands
if [ -f "package.json" ]; then
echo "=== Test Scripts ==="
cat package.json | jq '.scripts | select(. != null) | with_entries(select(.key | contains("test")))'
fi
Length of output: 119
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the test files for any existing coverage configuration
rg -l "coverage|collectCoverage" Server/tests
# Check if there's a .nycrc or similar coverage config
fd -g '.nycrc*'
fd -g '.coverage*'
# Check if there are any test runner configurations in the Server directory
fd -g '*test*config*' Server/
Length of output: 534
marcelluscaio
approved these changes
Nov 11, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds tetsts for the MaintenanceWindow module