Fixes Issue #610

[zachlankton]

This pull request fixes issue #610 as well as passes all legacy and non legacy tests (without the OTTOMAN_LEGACY_TEST=1 set).

Intermittently there would be LCB_ERR_KEYSPACE_NOT_FOUND when creating new collections and indexes. This would happen because sometimes the ensureCollections would return before the collections were actually ready. Additionally sometimes there would be Query Planning Failures when running on freshly created models because the ensureIndexes would not return the indexOnlinePromise unless indexReadyHooks were defined.

The changes in this pull request refactor some logic in the ensureCollections and ensureIndexes functions. It now guarantees that the collections and the indexes will be ready as described in the documentation.

[httpJunkie]

Thanks for the Pull Request and the detailed information about your findings and tests. I will approve and merge this PR.

[httpJunkie]

I've ran into some failed tests on both test and test:legacy so for this reason I am going to try and get one of our maintainers (Lino) to take a look at the PR and approve. But thank you for the PR, we are working on it.

[zachlankton]

Sounds good. Let me know if I can help! Will the github action run to test this?

[httpJunkie]

We will be reviewing this PR this week. We may make changes to or replace this PR with something else that works the same. Either way, we will resolve this issue.

[zachlankton]

Quick update: I have been using the code in this pull request for about a month now and have not found any new issues! 😊

[ejscribner]

Thanks for the update @zachlankton!! I'll see what we can do about getting this into the next release. I appreciate the contribution!

[ejscribner]

@zachlankton We've updated the testing workflow to include PRs from branches in forks. Could you amend your last commit (just change a single character or something) to trigger the tests?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #611 (fd01008) into master (1fb8ced) will decrease coverage by 0.21%.
The diff coverage is 87.92%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #611      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.21%   95.00%   -0.22%     
==========================================
  Files          93       93              
  Lines        2487     2580      +93     
  Branches      566      574       +8     
==========================================
+ Hits         2368     2451      +83     
- Misses        111      122      +11     
+ Partials        8        7       -1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/exceptions/exceptions.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/handler/find/find-by-id-options.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/handler/find/find-options.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/model/utils/update-refdoc-indexes.ts	54.54% <0.00%> (ø)
src/query/index.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/query/query.ts	87.41% <20.00%> (-2.45%)	⬇️
src/utils/parse-errors.ts	16.66% <22.22%> (-83.34%)	⬇️
src/model/index/n1ql/ensure-n1ql-indexes.ts	83.75% <57.89%> (+2.05%)	⬆️
src/model/create-model.ts	88.61% <66.66%> (-5.08%)	⬇️
src/model/utils/store-life-cycle.ts	92.68% <85.71%> (-7.32%)	⬇️
... and 30 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update a5a52f3...fd01008. Read the comment docs.

[zachlankton]

Looks like the tests are passing, but code coverage is failing for files and lines of code that this PR did not touch. Looks like the same thing is happening in PR #614

[zachlankton]

Actually, just noticed codecov is comparing this pull request to an old commit from August — 1fb8ced

[ejscribner]

I believe this is ok for now, I'll touch base with the team tomorrow. Thanks so much @zachlankton!

[ejscribner]

Hey @zachlankton just a quick update on this: we're planning on including it in our next release (sometime next week I believe)! Thanks again for being a part of our growing community. Cheers!