codecov[bot]
commented
6 months ago Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Comparison is base (
29f59c8) 89.32% compared to head (03a8daa) 89.47%.
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #330 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 89.32% 89.47% +0.14% ========================================== Files 11 11 Lines 684 684 ========================================== + Hits 611 612 +1 + Misses 73 72 -1 ```:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
ellnix
meili-bors[bot]
Pull Request
Related issue
Fixes #329 May fix #328
What does this PR do?
SafeIndexbefore I tried to fix #280 with #301 did not guarantee that its index exists at all, since@indexwas created asynchronously it was possible thatSafeIndex#settingscould be called on an index that does not exist. This line: https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch-rails/blob/29f59c88881b5a4b5a03d990f11d3aac220cd367/lib/meilisearch-rails.rb#L309 was supposed return an empty hash when asked to fetch the settings of an index that does not exist, howeverApiError#codeis the meilisearch code ("index_not_found") and not the http code (404). That line was therefore skipped and theindex_not_founderror was being propagated and caught by therescue nilin: https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch-rails/blob/e5ad4d1f10c078097bf211e4d3a6e1d48b24bbc5/lib/meilisearch-rails.rb#L750 until I removed it and tried to replace it with ensuring thatSafeIndexhad an index by makingcreate_index!synchronous and all kinds of hell broke loose since now every time an index was used would cause a synchronous wait.