fix(destroy): Properties updated in a beforeDestroy hook are now pers… by ddolcimascolo · Pull Request #9319 · sequelize/sequelize

ddolcimascolo · 2018-04-17T18:51:12Z

…isted on soft delete. Closes #9318

Pull Request check-list

Please make sure to review and check all of these items:

Does npm run test or npm run test-DIALECT pass with this change (including linting)?
Does the description below contain a link to an existing issue (Closes #[issue]) or a description of the issue you are solving?
Have you added new tests to prevent regressions?
Is a documentation update included (if this change modifies existing APIs, or introduces new ones)?
Did you follow the commit message conventions explained in CONTRIBUTING.md?

Description of change

When getting the list of things to update in the database to perform a soft delete, the code is now considering changed values (through Model.changed()) instead of only updating deletedAt.

Closes issue #9318

ddolcimascolo · 2018-04-17T18:55:19Z

I think this should be applied on 4.x branch also, but I'm unsure if I should submit a new PR targetting another branch, or if you automagically cherry-pick commits to backport...

Just tell me, I'm happy to open another PR if needs be.

codecov · 2018-04-17T18:58:14Z

Codecov Report

Merging #9319 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

sushantdhiman

A few changes

sushantdhiman · 2018-04-19T04:14:35Z

      });
    });

+    it('sets other changed values when soft deleting and a beforeDestroy hooks kicks in', function() {


Move to https://github.com/sequelize/sequelize/blob/master/test/integration/hooks/destroy.test.js

Please create a new group for paranoid, under that place this test

sushantdhiman · 2018-04-19T04:18:55Z

        const attribute = this.constructor.rawAttributes[this.constructor._timestampAttributes.deletedAt];
        const field = attribute.field || this.constructor._timestampAttributes.deletedAt;
-        const values = {};
+        const values = Utils.mapValueFieldNames(this, this.changed() || [], this.constructor);


it should be mapValueFieldNames(this.dataValues,....

sushantdhiman · 2018-04-19T04:21:55Z

    });

+    it('sets other changed values when soft deleting and a beforeDestroy hooks kicks in', function() {
+      const ParanoidUser = this.sequelize.define('ParanoidUser', {


Also add a test where you try to update a virtual field in hook and see it doesn't get updated (i.e. it should not throw error for unknown column)

sushantdhiman

LGTM, some cosmetic changes

sushantdhiman · 2018-04-19T07:14:40Z

    });
+
+    describe('with paranoid mode enabled', () => {
+


remove extra line

sushantdhiman · 2018-04-19T07:14:52Z

+            expect(user.virtualField).to.equal(0);
+          });
+      });
+


remove extra line

sushantdhiman · 2018-04-19T07:15:01Z

+      });
+
+    });
+


remove extra line

…isted on soft delete. Closes sequelize#9318

ddolcimascolo · 2018-04-19T08:38:22Z

@sushantdhiman Done, sorry for the extra blank lines

ddolcimascolo · 2018-04-19T08:56:12Z

Thanks for the appoval, what about the backport to v4 ?

sushantdhiman · 2018-04-19T08:59:21Z

Thanks for the appoval, what about the backport to v4 ?

I'll cherry pick commit from master and port to v4 :)

sushantdhiman · 2018-04-20T08:48:47Z

I was checking other use of this hook, we need to apply this change to

sequelize/lib/model.js

Lines 2546 to 2568 in 4caa17c

    
             // Get daos and run beforeDestroy hook on each record individually 
        
             if (options.individualHooks) { 
        
               return this.findAll({where: options.where, transaction: options.transaction, logging: options.logging, benchmark: options.benchmark}) 
        
                 .map(instance => this.runHooks('beforeDestroy', instance, options).then(() => instance)) 
        
                 .then(_instances => { 
        
                   instances = _instances; 
        
                 }); 
        
             } 
        
           }).then(() => { 
        
             // Run delete query (or update if paranoid) 
        
             if (this._timestampAttributes.deletedAt && !options.force) { 
        
               // Set query type appropriately when running soft delete 
        
               options.type = QueryTypes.BULKUPDATE; 
        
               const attrValueHash = {}; 
        
               const deletedAtAttribute = this.rawAttributes[this._timestampAttributes.deletedAt]; 
        
               const field = this.rawAttributes[this._timestampAttributes.deletedAt].field; 
        
               const where = {}; 
        
               where[field] = deletedAtAttribute.hasOwnProperty('defaultValue') ? deletedAtAttribute.defaultValue : null; 
        
               attrValueHash[field] = Utils.now(this.sequelize.options.dialect); 
        
               return this.QueryInterface.bulkUpdate(this.getTableName(options), attrValueHash, Object.assign(where, options.where), options, this.rawAttributes);

So individualHooks: true cases can use this as well. Will need extra tests.

Also Model.destroy is using is Utils.now but Model.prototype.destroy is setting new Date, probably both need to use Utils.now

This change may be unexpected for some users and definitely change hook behaviour (#9318 (comment)) so its better to keep this in v5

ddolcimascolo · 2018-04-23T07:52:59Z

Fine to keep this v5 only.
Regarding your latest comments I can handle the changes and add tests for the bulk destroy use cases. Will try to do this later this day and update the PR.

Cheers

ddolcimascolo · 2018-04-23T08:27:00Z

@sushantdhiman Sorry, I'm puzzled 😀

Model.destroy will indeed call the beforeDestroy hook on every instance impacted by the bulk destroy, but then how is the code supposed to "know" that some values changed on the instances, how is the code supposed to translate that in the bulk UPDATE statement that is issued to the database ?
We could even imagine that the hook has changed different attributes on different instances...

I'm thinking that the code should individually call destroy on each instance instead of doing a bulk operation, if and only if individualHooks: true is passed.

That would sum up to something like (pseudo-code):

runHook('beforeBulkDestroy')
if (individualHooks) {
  for each instance returned by findAll()
    instance.destroy()
} else {
  doTheBulkOperation
}
runHook('afterBulkDestroy')

Calling instance.destroy() will indeed run the before/afterDestroy hooks on it, which is what is expected by individualHooks: true anyway.

WDYT?

sushantdhiman · 2018-04-30T05:26:07Z

@ddolcimascolo Good question and your pseudo-code is exactly what we should do (like the update case), I reckon we need this change for restore process as well.

ddolcimascolo · 2018-07-05T05:48:57Z

Hey guys (and @sushantdhiman),

Can you share the status of this contribution? Do you need more code from me or can we consider it good to merge, eventually opening another issue to track the refactoring of the bulk 'destroy' operation?

For what it's worth, we're using this patch in production for several weeks now without any issue. It fits well with bonaval/sequelize-temporal#7 which I contributed too.

Thanks,
Regards,

David

sushantdhiman reviewed Apr 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

ddolcimascolo force-pushed the issue-9318 branch from 591e2ca to d1be757 Compare April 19, 2018 07:10

sushantdhiman reviewed Apr 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

fix(destroy): Properties updated in a beforeDestroy hook are now pers…

bb42b17

…isted on soft delete. Closes sequelize#9318

ddolcimascolo force-pushed the issue-9318 branch from d1be757 to bb42b17 Compare April 19, 2018 08:37

sushantdhiman approved these changes Apr 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

sushantdhiman requested a review from a team April 19, 2018 08:52

Merge branch 'master' into issue-9318

82b9bcc

sushantdhiman approved these changes Jul 5, 2018

View reviewed changes

sushantdhiman requested review from eseliger and janmeier July 5, 2018 05:51

sushantdhiman merged commit 0fe77d6 into sequelize:master Jul 22, 2018

nahdelgado mentioned this pull request Feb 6, 2020

support DataType.INTEGER for timestamp attributes #11161

Open

2 tasks done

Uh oh!

Conversation

ddolcimascolo commented Apr 17, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Pull Request check-list

Description of change

Uh oh!

ddolcimascolo commented Apr 17, 2018

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Apr 17, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

sushantdhiman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sushantdhiman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ddolcimascolo commented Apr 19, 2018

Uh oh!

ddolcimascolo commented Apr 19, 2018

Uh oh!

sushantdhiman commented Apr 19, 2018

Uh oh!

sushantdhiman commented Apr 20, 2018

Uh oh!

ddolcimascolo commented Apr 23, 2018

Uh oh!

ddolcimascolo commented Apr 23, 2018

Uh oh!

sushantdhiman commented Apr 30, 2018

Uh oh!

ddolcimascolo commented Jul 5, 2018

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

ddolcimascolo commented Apr 17, 2018 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Apr 17, 2018 •

edited

Loading