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
Fix 2307 v1 #2314
Fix 2307 v1 #2314
Conversation
@abretaud I'll continue to take a look, but feel free to push here, as well. |
@abretaud I added a change to allow sequence to be writeable, which was causing errors in some of my changes. I guess the thing I'm a little unsure of whether you want to allow deletion / update of Sequence / Scaffold objects in the code, or just the addition of them. If you allow deletion, you have to delete all of the annotations associated with them (or explicitly check and disallow them). If you allow updates, then this code should work. My intuition is that we simply don't allow alteration of existing sequences, just addition of new scaffolds. From the original problem description, it sounded like you only wanted to be able to add them. I think the current issue now is that some of the tests fail (4) because the organism is created with a genomic FASTA sequence and then updated for a refSeq.json. Because the original keeps the FASTA sequence it gets confused, so I think it ends up creating a second sequence. Anyway, my recommendation:
|
Hum, it should be fasta for all test data I'm using, it's the dataset_x_files dirs in https://github.com/galaxy-genome-annotation/python-apollo/tree/2c916d295776c6a57dd015464dd7b1b30eb79b7f/test-data
There is always the no_reload_sequences param when you want to be sure not to lose anything So it would look like this:
|
Some progress:
It seems like organismDataFile is null there while it should not: do you see a reason why? Something in the handling of uploaded file (I think it is sent properly by python-apollo)? |
@abretaud I think the problem is that things are being posted potentially wrong. I have a piece of code here: Apollo/grails-app/controllers/org/bbop/apollo/OrganismController.groovy Lines 1306 to 1308 in e5dfdde
That checks for a regular shiro request instead of a form post type: If I remove the check I get:
Note that I don't have that check in other parts of my code, but I think this method gets used in other ways, so its probably still applicable? Maybe the The flag should probably be |
@abretaud / @erasche The default communication I use (at least on the GWT-side) is:
I noticed you don't actually seem to test the I added this just to confirm my suspicions:
|
To be sure I sniffed the http traffic with wireshark: addOrganismWithSequence and updateOrganismInfo posted content look very similar, and both have the multipart/form-data content type (added automatically by python requests module) |
Do their headers and other content being sent look similar?
… On Nov 18, 2019, at 6:41 AM, Anthony Bretaudeau ***@***.***> wrote:
To be sure I sniffed the http traffic with wireshark: addOrganismWithSequence and updateOrganismInfo posted content look very similar, and both have the multipart/form-data content type (added automatically by python requests module)
So I guess the problem is probably on the grails/Apollo side
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2314?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAFXNKTLSRQNC7FQ5V4V6O3QUKSRZA5CNFSM4JKOI342YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEEKUZHQ#issuecomment-555043998>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFXNKQMXVSAA2J57PDKGJTQUKSRZANCNFSM4JKOI34Q>.
|
That is strange . . okay . . I'll take a look. Probably tomorrow for me, though. This is very helpful. |
@abretaud So in some cases form data is being sent over and in some cases it is not. So for example here:
and here:
But in some cases it does get sent through as multi-part form data. So, I think there are two methods for calling updateOrganism as well. One in the So, my guess is that its calling the wrong thing in the wrong place. I'll have to explore it. |
@abretaud The problem was that the |
@abretaud I am going to merge this in for now in order to simplify the testing, but we can add more for sure |
fixes #2307
Replaces my bad merge in #2310