Backport to branch(3) : Fix to put state even in read-only transactions #187
Conversation
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @feeblefakie, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request backports a critical fix to ensure that the state of transactions is consistently recorded, regardless of whether they involve write operations or are purely read-only. This improves the robustness and traceability of transaction states within the system, accompanied by enhanced test coverage to validate the corrected behavior.
Highlights
- Core Logic Fix: The
stateManager.putCommitcall inScalarTamperEvidentAssetLedger.javahas been moved to ensure that transaction state is recorded even for read-only transactions (i.e., transactions without a write set). Previously, this call was conditionally executed only when a write set was present, leading to state not being recorded for read-only operations. - Test Coverage Enhancement: Existing unit tests in
ScalarTamperEvidentAssetLedgerTest.javahave been refactored and new parameterized tests introduced to thoroughly verify the corrected behavior. This includes tests specifically for read-only transactions, ensuring that the state manager correctly records the transaction state based on the configuration, even when no data is written. - Build Dependency Update: The
ledger/build.gradlefile has been updated to includejunit-jupiter-paramsas a test implementation dependency, which is necessary to support the newly introduced parameterized tests.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
The code changes in this pull request address an issue where the transaction state might be committed before the actual data is persisted, potentially leading to data inconsistency. The fix involves reordering the operations to ensure data persistence before committing the transaction state. Additionally, the pull request includes updates to the test suite to accommodate the changes and ensure the correct behavior in different scenarios.
| verify(transaction, never()).put(any(List.class)); | ||
| verify(transaction, never()).put(any(Put.class)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since this test is for read-only transactions, the snapshot should not be putting any data. Remove the line snapshot.put(ANY_ID, asset); to accurately reflect a read-only transaction.
| @ParameterizedTest | ||
| @ValueSource(booleans = {true, false}) | ||
| public void commit_ReadOnlyTransactionGiven_ShouldPutWithStateManagerAccordingToConfig( | ||
| boolean txStateManagementEnabled) | ||
| throws CrudException, CommitException, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The name of the test commit_ReadOnlyTransactionGiven_ShouldPutWithStateManagerAccordingToConfig is misleading, since read-only transactions should not be putting anything. This test is actually testing the behavior of write transactions when tx state management is enabled or disabled. Rename the test to reflect this.
@ParameterizedTest
@ValueSource(booleans = {true, false})
public void commit_WriteTransactionGiven_ShouldPutWithStateManagerAccordingToConfig(
boolean txStateManagementEnabled)
2 participants
This is an automated backport of the following:
Please merge this PR after all checks have passed.