Hcm1.5 sequence diagram - user action #927
Conversation
kanishq-egov
requested review from
kavi-egov and
sathishp-eGov
as code owners
WalkthroughThe changes introduce new sequence diagrams for user action management within a project management system. These diagrams detail the processes for bulk creating, searching, and updating user actions. Each process includes request validation, error handling, and interactions with services like RedisCache, Kafka, and database systems. The diagrams outline the flow of data and the conditions under which various error handling methods are invoked, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of user action management. Changes
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 19
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- docs/health-api-specs/sequence-diagrams/project/UserAction/create.puml (1 hunks)
- docs/health-api-specs/sequence-diagrams/project/UserAction/search.puml (1 hunks)
- docs/health-api-specs/sequence-diagrams/project/UserAction/update.puml (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
docs/health-api-specs/sequence-diagrams/project/UserAction/search.puml (1)
48-52:⚠️ Potential issuePotential redundant or misplaced interaction after
altblocks.After the
altblocks end at line 47, there is an interaction wheresqueriesrcagain starting at line 48. This interaction seems redundant or out of place because caching was already handled within the previousaltblocks.Please verify whether this interaction is necessary or if it should be part of one of the previous conditional blocks.
Run the following script to check for unmatched
alt,else, andendstatements to ensure proper structure:This script helps identify any mismatches in the control flow keywords.
✅ Verification successful
Redundant Interaction Verified
The interaction after the
altblocks does not present any structural issues, and the control flow is properly matched. No redundant interactions were found.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the matching of 'alt', 'else', and 'end' statements in the diagram. # Count occurrences grep -E '^[[:space:]]*(alt|else|end)' docs/health-api-specs/sequence-diagrams/project/UserAction/search.puml | sort | uniq -cLength of output: 426
docs/health-api-specs/sequence-diagrams/project/UserAction/update.puml (1)
87-91: Confirm the error handling strategy for recoverable errors.In the note for the "boundary invalid" scenario, it mentions that the error will be marked as recoverable and retried later with the error code
DEPENDENCY_ERROR. Ensure that the system's error handling logic supports retrying on such errors.Please confirm that
DEPENDENCY_ERRORis appropriately handled by the system and that retry mechanisms are in place for this error code.
| alt record doesn't exist | ||
| s -> rc: Search record based on clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId | ||
| activate rc | ||
| rc -> s: 0 rows | ||
| deactivate rc | ||
| s -> db: Search record based on clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId | ||
| activate db | ||
| db -> s: 0 rows | ||
| deactivate db | ||
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 400 with appropriate error code | ||
| note left | ||
| Error Code: RECORD_NOT_FOUND | ||
| end note | ||
| end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Misuse of nested alt blocks may cause confusion; consider restructuring.
Within the alt search by clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId block starting at line 19, there are two nested alt blocks at the same level (lines 20 and 34). This structure may not accurately represent the intended flow and can be confusing.
Consider restructuring the nested alt and else blocks to better represent the alternative scenarios. Here's a suggested revision:
alt search by clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId
- alt record doesn't exist
+ alt record exists in cache
s -> rc: Search record based on clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId
activate rc
- rc -> s: 0 rows
+ rc -> s: 1 row
deactivate rc
- s -> db: Search record based on clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId
- activate db
- db -> s: 0 rows
- deactivate db
- s -> c: HttpStatus: 400 with appropriate error code
- note left
- Error Code: RECORD_NOT_FOUND
- end note
+ s -> c: HttpStatus: 200 with appropriate response code
end
- alt record doesn't exists in cache
+ else record doesn't exist in cache
s -> rc: Search record based on clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId
activate rc
rc -> s: 0 rows
deactivate rc
s -> db: Search record based on clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId
activate db
- db -> s: 1 row
+ db -> s: [0 or 1] row
deactivate db
- s -> rc: 1 record
- activate rc
- deactivate rc
- s -> c: HttpStatus: 200 with appropriate response code
+ alt record found in DB
+ s -> rc: Cache the record
+ activate rc
+ deactivate rc
+ s -> c: HttpStatus: 200 with appropriate response code
+ else record not found in DB
+ s -> c: HttpStatus: 400 with appropriate error code
+ note left
+ Error Code: RECORD_NOT_FOUND
+ end note
+ end
end
endThis adjustment clarifies the flow:
- If the record exists in cache, return it with a 200 response.
- Else, check the database:
- If found, cache it and return a 200 response.
- If not found, return a 400 error with
RECORD_NOT_FOUND.
Also applies to: 34-47
| note left | ||
| Error Code: REQUEST_VALIDATION_FAILED | ||
| end note |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick (assertive)
Inconsistent formatting of error codes in notes.
The notes for error codes at lines 14-16, 30-32, and 59-61 use note left. Ensure consistency in note placement and consider specifying the participant involved for clarity.
For better clarity, you might specify the participant over which the note appears. For example:
-note left
+note over s
Error Code: REQUEST_VALIDATION_FAILED
end noteApplying this change to all error notes ensures consistency and improves readability.
Also applies to: 30-32, 59-61
| Error Code: RECORD_NOT_FOUND | ||
| end note | ||
| end | ||
| alt record doesn't exists in cache |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick (assertive)
Typographical error in alt block description.
At line 34, there's a grammatical error:
- Original:
alt record doesn't exists in cache - Corrected:
alt record doesn't exist in cache
Apply this correction:
-alt record doesn't exists in cache
+alt record doesn't exist in cache📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| alt record doesn't exists in cache | |
| alt record doesn't exist in cache |
| activate db | ||
| db -> s: 1-n rows | ||
| deactivate db | ||
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 200 OK with found record(s) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Specify the structure of the returned records for clarity.
At line 67, the diagram indicates HttpStatus: 200 OK with found record(s). To improve clarity, consider specifying or referencing the structure of the returned data.
You might include a note or a reference to the data model:
s -> c: HttpStatus: 200 OK with found record(s)
+note right
+ Returns: List of UserAction objects
+end noteThis addition provides recipients of the diagram with more context about the response.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 200 OK with found record(s) | |
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 200 OK with found record(s) | |
| note right | |
| Returns: List of UserAction objects | |
| end note |
| alt request validation fails | ||
| s -> s: Request validation failed | ||
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 400 with appropriate error code | ||
| note left | ||
| Error Code: REQUEST_VALIDATION_FAILED | ||
| end note | ||
| end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Incorrect use of alt block without corresponding else.
In the sequence diagram, the alt block starting at line 11 is used to represent the scenario where the request validation fails. However, there is no corresponding else block to represent the scenario where the request validation succeeds. This can lead to confusion in understanding the flow of the diagram.
To fix this, you should add an else block to represent the successful validation path:
alt request validation fails
s -> s: Request validation failed
s -> c: HttpStatus: 400 with appropriate error code
note left
Error Code: REQUEST_VALIDATION_FAILED
end note
+else request validation succeeds
+ s -> s: Request validation successful
endThis change ensures that both outcomes of the request validation are clearly depicted.
Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| alt request validation fails | ||
| s -> s: Request validation failed | ||
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 400 with appropriate error code | ||
| note left | ||
| Error Code: REQUEST_VALIDATION_FAILED | ||
| end note | ||
| end | ||
| s -> s: Request validation successful | ||
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 202 ACCEPTED |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use 'else' for Request Validation Success Path
In the alt block starting at line 21 (request validation fails), there is no else block to represent the case when the request validation succeeds. According to PlantUML syntax, you should include an else to depict alternative scenarios within the same alt block. Update the diagram as follows:
alt request validation fails
s -> s: Request validation failed
s -> c: HttpStatus: 400 with appropriate error code
note left
Error Code: REQUEST_VALIDATION_FAILED
end note
+else request validation successful
s -> s: Request validation successful
s -> c: HttpStatus: 202 ACCEPTED
end📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| alt request validation fails | |
| s -> s: Request validation failed | |
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 400 with appropriate error code | |
| note left | |
| Error Code: REQUEST_VALIDATION_FAILED | |
| end note | |
| end | |
| s -> s: Request validation successful | |
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 202 ACCEPTED | |
| alt request validation fails | |
| s -> s: Request validation failed | |
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 400 with appropriate error code | |
| note left | |
| Error Code: REQUEST_VALIDATION_FAILED | |
| end note | |
| else request validation successful | |
| s -> s: Request validation successful | |
| s -> c: HttpStatus: 202 ACCEPTED | |
| end |
| alt projectId invalid | ||
| s -> db: Check if projectId exists | ||
| activate db | ||
| db -> s: 0 rows | ||
| deactivate db | ||
| s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod | ||
| note left | ||
| This will be marked as unrecoverable right away | ||
| and require manual intervention | ||
| Error Code: BAD_REQUEST | ||
| end note | ||
| end | ||
| s -> db: Check if projectId exists | ||
| activate db | ||
| db -> s: 1 row | ||
| deactivate db |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add 'else' Block for Valid projectId Scenario
The alt block starting at line 58 (projectId invalid) lacks an else block for when the projectId is valid. Include an else block to represent both conditions:
alt projectId invalid
s -> db: Check if projectId exists
activate db
db -> s: 0 rows
deactivate db
s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod
note left
This will be marked as unrecoverable right away
and require manual intervention
Error Code: BAD_REQUEST
end note
end
+else projectId valid
s -> db: Check if projectId exists
activate db
db -> s: 1 row
deactivate db
end📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| alt projectId invalid | |
| s -> db: Check if projectId exists | |
| activate db | |
| db -> s: 0 rows | |
| deactivate db | |
| s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod | |
| note left | |
| This will be marked as unrecoverable right away | |
| and require manual intervention | |
| Error Code: BAD_REQUEST | |
| end note | |
| end | |
| s -> db: Check if projectId exists | |
| activate db | |
| db -> s: 1 row | |
| deactivate db | |
| alt projectId invalid | |
| s -> db: Check if projectId exists | |
| activate db | |
| db -> s: 0 rows | |
| deactivate db | |
| s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod | |
| note left | |
| This will be marked as unrecoverable right away | |
| and require manual intervention | |
| Error Code: BAD_REQUEST | |
| end note | |
| end | |
| else projectId valid | |
| s -> db: Check if projectId exists | |
| activate db | |
| db -> s: 1 row | |
| deactivate db | |
| end |
| alt boundary invalid | ||
| s -> bs: Check if boundary exists | ||
| activate bs | ||
| bs -> s: 0 rows | ||
| deactivate bs | ||
| s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod | ||
| note left | ||
| This will be marked as recoverable and will be | ||
| retried later | ||
| Error Code: DEPENDENCY_ERROR | ||
| end note | ||
| end | ||
| s -> bs: Check if boundary exists | ||
| activate bs | ||
| bs -> s: 1 row | ||
| deactivate bs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Include 'else' Block for Valid Boundary Scenario
In the alt block starting at line 74 (boundary invalid), there is no else block for when the boundary is valid. To accurately depict both scenarios, add an else block:
alt boundary invalid
s -> bs: Check if boundary exists
activate bs
bs -> s: 0 rows
deactivate bs
s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod
note left
This will be marked as recoverable and will be
retried later
Error Code: DEPENDENCY_ERROR
end note
end
+else boundary valid
s -> bs: Check if boundary exists
activate bs
bs -> s: 1 row
deactivate bs
endCommittable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| alt record already exists | ||
| alt record found in cache | ||
| s -> rc: Check using clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId | ||
| activate rc | ||
| rc -> s: 1 row | ||
| deactivate rc | ||
| s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod | ||
| note left | ||
| Error Code: RECORD_ALREADY_EXISTS | ||
| end note | ||
| end | ||
| s -> rc: Check using clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId | ||
| activate rc | ||
| rc -> s: 0 rows | ||
| deactivate rc | ||
| s -> db: Check if record already exists | ||
| activate db | ||
| db -> s: 1 row | ||
| deactivate db | ||
| s -> rc: Put data in cache using clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId | ||
| activate rc | ||
| deactivate rc | ||
| s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod | ||
| note left | ||
| Error Code: RECORD_ALREADY_EXISTS | ||
| end note | ||
| end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Include 'else' Block for Record Not Existing
In the alt block starting at line 31 (record already exists), there is no else block for the scenario where the record does not already exist. To clearly represent both outcomes, add an else block:
alt record already exists
alt record found in cache
s -> rc: Check using clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId
activate rc
rc -> s: 1 row
deactivate rc
s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod
note left
Error Code: RECORD_ALREADY_EXISTS
end note
end
s -> rc: Check using clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId
activate rc
rc -> s: 0 rows
deactivate rc
s -> db: Check if record already exists
activate db
db -> s: 1 row
deactivate db
s -> rc: Put data in cache using clientReferenceId/serverGeneratedId
activate rc
deactivate rc
s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod
note left
Error Code: RECORD_ALREADY_EXISTS
end note
end
+else record does not exist
... (Proceed with processing new record)
endCommittable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| alt id generation fails | ||
| s -> idgen: /id/_generate | ||
| activate idgen | ||
| idgen -> s: HttpStatus: 400 | ||
| deactivate idgen | ||
| s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod | ||
| note left | ||
| This will be marked as recoverable and | ||
| will be retried later | ||
| Error Code: ID_GENERATION_FAILED | ||
| end note | ||
| end | ||
| s -> idgen: Generate ID | ||
| activate idgen | ||
| idgen -> s: Generated ID | ||
| deactivate idgen |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add 'else' Block for Successful ID Generation
The alt block starting at line 90 (id generation fails) does not have an else block for the successful ID generation scenario. Include an else block to represent both possibilities:
alt id generation fails
s -> idgen: /id/_generate
activate idgen
idgen -> s: HttpStatus: 400
deactivate idgen
s -> he: call handleError HandleErrorMethod
note left
This will be marked as recoverable and
will be retried later
Error Code: ID_GENERATION_FAILED
end note
end
+else id generation successful
s -> idgen: Generate ID
activate idgen
idgen -> s: Generated ID
deactivate idgen
s -> s: Update generated ID in UserAction Data
endCommittable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Documentation