fix: forceDisconnect should not require ID #46
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Valery Piashchynski <[email protected]>
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve updates to the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Client
participant RPC
participant Lock
Client->>RPC: Call ForceRelease(resource)
RPC->>Lock: Attempt to release resource
Lock-->>RPC: Return success or failure
RPC-->>Client: Return response
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
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
tests/rpc.go (2)
Line range hint
105-119: Critical: Improve error handling for connection failuresThe function currently returns
nilfor connection errors, which could mask important connectivity issues and make debugging harder. This pattern appears in several functions (updateTTL,exists, andforceRelease).Consider this fix:
func forceRelease(address string, resource string) (bool, error) { conn, err := net.Dial("tcp", address) if err != nil { - return false, nil + return false, fmt.Errorf("failed to connect to lock server: %w", err) } client := rpc.NewClientWithCodec(goridgeRpc.NewClientCodec(conn)) req := &lockApi.Request{ Resource: resource, } resp := &lockApi.Response{} err = client.Call(forceReleaseRPC, req, resp) if err != nil { - return false, nil + return false, fmt.Errorf("force release RPC call failed: %w", err) } return resp.Ok, nil }🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
105-105: forceRelease - result 1 (error) is always nil
(unparam)
Line range hint
21-119: Maintain consistent error handling across RPC functionsThe codebase shows inconsistent error handling patterns:
lock()andlockRead()properly propagate connection and RPC errorsupdateTTL(),exists(), andforceRelease()suppress errors by returning nilrelease()properly handles errorsThis inconsistency makes the API behavior unpredictable for consumers.
Consider standardizing error handling across all RPC functions to either:
- Properly propagate all errors (recommended)
- Document why certain functions intentionally suppress errors
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
105-105: forceRelease - result 1 (error) is always nil
(unparam)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (3)
go.sumis excluded by!**/*.sumgo.work.sumis excluded by!**/*.sumtests/go.sumis excluded by!**/*.sum
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
go.mod(1 hunks)rpc.go(0 hunks)tests/go.mod(1 hunks)tests/lock_test.go(3 hunks)tests/rpc.go(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- rpc.go
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- go.mod
- tests/go.mod
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 golangci-lint
tests/rpc.go
105-105: forceRelease - result 1 (error) is always nil
(unparam)
🔇 Additional comments (5)
tests/rpc.go (2)
105-105: LGTM: Function signature change aligns with requirements
The removal of the id parameter from forceRelease correctly implements the requested change from the PR objective.
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
105-105: forceRelease - result 1 (error) is always nil
(unparam)
Line range hint 105-119: Verify the intended behavior of resource-level force release
The removal of ID validation means forceRelease will now potentially release all locks on a resource rather than a specific lock. Please verify if this broader impact is intended and properly documented.
Let's check the related issue and documentation:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the test implementation in TestForceRelease, I can now provide a definitive response about the intended behavior:
Force release is designed to clear all locks on a resource
The test case confirms this is the intended behavior:
- It first acquires a write lock with ID "bar"
- A read lock attempt with ID "bar1" fails
- Force release is called on the resource "foo" without an ID
- After force release, a new read lock with ID "bar1" succeeds
This matches the implementation change and resolves issue #2050 where force release was incorrectly requiring an ID. The broader impact of releasing all locks on a resource is the intended administrative cleanup behavior.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the related issue description
gh issue view 2050 --repo roadrunner-server/roadrunner
# Look for any documentation about force release behavior
fd -e md -e txt . --exec rg -i "force.*release|release.*lock" {}
Length of output: 1050
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the implementation of force release in the lock package
ast-grep --pattern 'func $_($$) {
$$$
forceRelease
$$$
}'
# Check for any tests related to force release
rg -i "test.*force.*release|force.*release.*test" -A 5
# Check the RPC handler implementation
ast-grep --pattern 'func (s $_) ForceRelease($_, $_) $_ {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 468
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the test implementation to understand the expected behavior
cat tests/lock_test.go
# Let's also check the config file used in the test
cat configs/.rr-lock-init.yaml
# Check for any related changes in the commit history
git log -p --grep="force.*release"
Length of output: 16284
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint
105-105: forceRelease - result 1 (error) is always nil
(unparam)
tests/lock_test.go (3)
246-248: LGTM! forceRelease signature change aligns with PR objective
The removal of the ID parameter from forceRelease call is consistent with the PR's goal to remove ID check from forceDisconnect.
Line range hint 669-685: LGTM! Comprehensive test coverage for forceRelease
The test case thoroughly validates the modified forceRelease behavior:
- Verifies force release succeeds
- Confirms new lock can be acquired after force release
- Includes proper cleanup with release
- Has appropriate assertions for each step
177-177: Verify test coverage with reduced iterations
The reduction from 1000 to 100 iterations decreases test duration, but we should verify that 100 iterations still provide sufficient coverage for race condition testing.
✅ Verification successful
100 iterations are sufficient for race condition testing
The test is well-designed for race condition verification:
- It's explicitly marked as a "race condition test" in comments
- Each iteration spawns 5 concurrent goroutines attempting to acquire locks
- The test includes randomization of resources, IDs, and timing
- With 100 iterations, this results in 500 concurrent lock attempts, which provides good coverage
- The test uses varying wait and TTL durations to create different timing scenarios
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if there are any race-related issues reported in the test history
# Look for race condition related terms in commit messages and issues
# Check commit history for race-related test failures
git log -S "race condition" --pickaxe-regex --grep "test.*race" -p -- tests/lock_test.go
# Check issues for race-related test failures
gh issue list --search "race condition in:title,body path:tests/lock_test.go"
Length of output: 230
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's analyze the test file to understand the purpose and context of these iterations
# First, get the full test function context
rg -B 10 -A 20 "for i := 0; i < 100; i\+\+" tests/lock_test.go
# Also check for any other similar loop patterns in tests
rg "for .+ := 0.+; .+ < \d+" tests/lock_test.go
# Look for any race-related test configurations or comments
rg -i "race|concurrent" tests/lock_test.go
Length of output: 1311
Reason for This PR
ref: roadrunner-server/roadrunner#2050
Description of Changes
forceDisconnectmethod.License Acceptance
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the MIT license.
PR Checklist
[Author TODO: Meet these criteria.][Reviewer TODO: Verify that these criteria are met. Request changes if not]git commit -s).CHANGELOG.md.Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
ForceReleasemethod, allowing it to proceed without ID validation.Bug Fixes
updateTTLandforceReleasefunctions to return nil on connection errors, which may affect error reporting.Tests
TestLockInitandTestForceReleaseto improve execution efficiency.forceReleasefunction signature in tests to remove the ID parameter.Chores
google.golang.org/protobuffromv1.35.1tov1.35.2.