test(server): incorrect prisma overriding

[L-Sun]

In some backend server tests, overrideProvider(PrismaClient).useClass(FakePrisma) dose not have effect.

AFFiNE/packages/backend/server/tests/app.e2e.ts

Lines 49 to 59 in 67dffc2

	test.beforeEach(async t => {
	const { app } = await createTestingApp({
	imports: [AppModule],
	tapModule(builder) {
	builder
	.overrideProvider(PrismaClient)
	.useClass(FakePrisma)
	.overrideProvider(FeatureManagementService)
	.useValue({ canEarlyAccess: () => true });
	},
	});

AFFiNE/packages/backend/server/tests/mailer.spec.ts

Lines 129 to 143 in 67dffc2

	test.beforeEach(async t => {
	const { module, app } = await createTestingApp({
	imports: [AppModule],
	tapModule: module => {
	module
	.overrideProvider(PrismaClient)
	.useValue(FakePrisma)
	.overrideProvider(FeatureManagementService)
	.useValue({
	hasWorkspaceFeature() {
	return false;
	},
	});
	},
	});

the Injectable may only effect the PrismaService not PrismaClient

AFFiNE/packages/backend/server/src/fundamentals/prisma/service.ts

Lines 5 to 10 in 67dffc2

	@Injectable()
	export class PrismaService
	extends PrismaClient
	implements OnModuleInit, OnModuleDestroy
	{
	static INSTANCE: PrismaService | null = null;

In mailer.spec.ts, however, it seem some methods are missing in FakePrisma, which led to the test failing after fixing the override problem. So I keep this code unchanged.

The test of mailer.spec.ts seems to only test the success of sending emails. I think there is no need to mock Prisma behavior. Just providing some fake data to the send function is good.

AFFiNE/packages/backend/server/tests/mailer.spec.ts

Lines 171 to 189 in 67dffc2

	const resp = await mail.sendInviteEmail(
	'production@toeverything.info',
	inviteId,
	{
	workspace: {
	id: inviteInfo.workspace.id,
	name: inviteInfo.workspace.name,
	avatar: '',
	},
	user: {
	avatar: inviteInfo.user?.avatarUrl || '',
	name: inviteInfo.user?.name || '',
	},
	}
	);
	t.is(resp.accepted.length, 1, 'failed to send invite email');
	}
	t.pass();

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[forehalo]

Hi @L-Sun, thanks for your contribution. It's my mistake.

I previously made PrismaService as an alias of PrismaClient from @prisma/client for easier importing(we don't have path alias so sometime we might need a lot of parent directory seeking like '../../../prisma' for importing PrismaService)

The problem is I didn't replace all PrismaService with PrismaClient at once, which seems to be a bad decision now. I will continue doing the replacing and once I finish it, I will also forbid the using of PrismaService.

[nx-cloud]

☁️ Nx Cloud Report

CI is running/has finished running commands for commit 98f7132. As they complete they will appear below. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this CI Pipeline Execution

---

✅ Successfully ran 6 targets

• nx test:coverage @affine/monorepo
• nx build @affine/native -- --target x86_64-pc-windows-msvc --use-napi-cross
• nx build @affine/storage -- --target x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu --use-napi-cross
• nx build @affine/native -- --target x86_64-apple-darwin --use-napi-cross
• nx build @affine/native -- --target aarch64-apple-darwin --use-napi-cross
• nx build @affine/native -- --target x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu --use-napi-cross

---

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (201f680) 64.51% compared to head (98f7132) 64.72%.
Report is 7 commits behind head on canary.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           canary    #5857      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   64.51%   64.72%   +0.21%     
==========================================
  Files         360      358       -2     
  Lines       19956    19907      -49     
  Branches     1701     1697       -4     
==========================================
+ Hits        12874    12885      +11     
+ Misses       6863     6803      -60     
  Partials      219      219              

Flag	Coverage Δ
server-test	71.57% <100.00%> (+0.21%)	⬆️
unittest	45.39% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[graphite-app]

Merge activity

• Feb 21, 10:41 PM EST: forehalo added this pull request to the Graphite merge queue.
• Feb 21, 10:44 PM EST: The Graphite merge queue wasn't able to merge this pull request due to internal failures.
• Feb 21, 10:51 PM EST: forehalo added this pull request to the Graphite merge queue.
• Feb 21, 10:54 PM EST: The Graphite merge queue wasn't able to merge this pull request due to internal failures.