fix: execute hincrby cmd more than one times after delete a field which is existing #2836
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes enhance the handling of data in the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
github-actions
bot
added
☢️ Bug
![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
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- src/storage/src/redis_hashes.cc (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (1)
src/storage/src/redis_hashes.cc (1)
311-312: LGTM! Enhanced data handling withBaseDataValue.The changes improve data integrity and consistency by wrapping
value_bufin aBaseDataValueinstance and using itsEncodemethod. This aligns with best practices for structured data handling.
AlexStocks
changed the title
|
Please add a go test. And submit the same pr to https://github.com/OpenAtomFoundation/pikiwidb too. thx. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- tests/integration/hash_test.go (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (1)
tests/integration/hash_test.go (1)
143-162: LGTM! The new test case is comprehensive.The new test case effectively verifies the behavior of the
HIncrBycommand when interacting with a hash key that has been modified. It ensures that the increment operation works as expected even after the field has been deleted and recreated.Ensure consistency with existing test cases.
Verification successful
The new test case is appropriate and non-redundant.
The new test case
It("should HIncrBy against wrong metadata")effectively verifies the behavior of theHIncrBycommand when interacting with a hash key that has been modified. This scenario is not covered by the existing test cases, making the new test case valuable and necessary.
- The new test case is distinct from the existing
HIncrByandHIncrByFloattest cases.- It specifically tests the behavior after the field has been deleted and recreated, which is not covered by other tests.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of the new test case with existing test cases. # Test: Search for similar test cases. Expect: No redundant test cases. rg --type go -A 5 $'It("should HIncrBy against wrong metadata")'Length of output: 65
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for other test cases involving the HIncrBy command to ensure consistency and avoid redundancy. # Test: Search for test cases involving the HIncrBy command. rg --type go -A 5 'HIncrBy'Length of output: 6056
fix: #2835
It can work.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Summary by CodeRabbit
Bug Fixes
Tests
HIncrBycommand to verify its behavior with modified hash keys, improving test coverage for edge cases.