[NV-3037] 🐛 Bug Report: Wrong Socket Close in useUnreadCount.ts

[Khongchai]

📜 Description

In this hook, you're doing socket.on(WebSocketEventEnum.UNREAD) but you're doing socket.off(WebSocketEventEnum.UNSEEN).

👟 Reproduction steps

None

👍 Expected behavior

It should closes the correct socket channel.

👎 Actual Behavior with Screenshots

    socket.on(
      WebSocketEventEnum.UNREAD, // <<<<<<<<<<<<< here
      debounce((data?: { unreadCount: number }) => {
        if (Number.isInteger(data?.unreadCount)) {
          queryClient.setQueryData<{ count: number }>(queryKeysRef.current.unreadCountQueryKey, (oldData) => ({
            count: data?.unreadCount ?? oldData.count,
          }));

          // when unread count changes, we need to refetch unseen count
          queryClient.refetchQueries(queryKeysRef.current.unseenCountQueryKey, {
            exact: false,
          });
          queryClient.refetchQueries(queryKeysRef.current.fetchNotificationsQueryKey, {
            exact: false,
          });
          // refetch all feeds unseen count that is shown on the tabs
          queryClient.refetchQueries([...FEED_UNSEEN_COUNT_QUERY_KEY], {
            exact: false,
          });

          dispatchUnreadCountEvent(data.unreadCount);
        }
      }, DEBOUNCE_TIME)
    );

    return () => {
      socket.off(WebSocketEventEnum.UNSEEN); // <<<<<<<<<<<<< here
    };
  }, [socket, queryClient, setQueryKey]);

Novu version

0.17.0

npm version

No response

node version

No response

📃 Provide any additional context for the Bug.

No response

👀 Have you spent some time to check if this bug has been raised before?

• I checked and didn't find a similar issue

🏢 Have you read the Contributing Guidelines?

• I have read the Contributing Guidelines

Are you willing to submit PR?

Yes

_NV-3037

[Khongchai]

Just noticed that the query being refetched is also the wrong one.

[p-fernandez]

Thank you for raising this bug. Indeed you are right.
I am assigning the issue to you as you mention you are happy to raise a PR to fix it.

[krishanu7]

Please assigne me

[Khongchai]

@p-fernandez I'll open a PR for the socket one.

Perhaps @krishanu7 can have this other one?

These still references unseen count when they should probably be unread.

[p-fernandez]

@p-fernandez I'll open a PR for the socket one.

Perhaps @krishanu7 can have this other one?

These still references unseen count when they should probably be unread.

I think it is better if you can fix both issues in the same PR as you identified them. 🙂

[Khongchai]

@p-fernandez just checked the code. It seems the other parts I mentioned were actually already correct, no?

It's just reflecting the change after having updated unread to unseen. Please let me know if my assumption is correct. If not, I'll add more changes.

Here's the PR #4590