synapsecns / sanguine

Synapse Monorepo
MIT License
43 stars 31 forks source link

RFQ-Indexer DB updates #3239

Closed Defi-Moses closed 1 month ago

Defi-Moses commented 1 month ago

Changes two small naming conventions for stanadardization

Summary by CodeRabbit

coderabbitai[bot] commented 1 month ago

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request involve modifications to the BridgeProofDisputedEvents table schema in the ponder.schema.ts file. The fields chainId and chain have been renamed to originChainId and originChain, respectively, to enhance clarity and consistency with other event tables. Additionally, the event handling logic for FastBridgeV2 events has been updated to reflect these new field names, ensuring uniformity across the codebase.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
packages/rfq-indexer/indexer/ponder.schema.ts Renamed fields chainId to originChainId and chain to originChain in BridgeProofDisputedEvents. Updated event handling logic to reflect these changes.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

size/m, Sol, Typescript

Suggested reviewers

Poem

In the schema where events do play,
chainId transformed, a bright new day.
originChainId now takes the stage,
Consistency blooms, wisdom of age.
With each little change, we hop and cheer,
For clarity's path is now crystal clear! 🐰✨


πŸ“œ Recent review details **Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml** **Review profile: CHILL**
πŸ“₯ Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 61c231092b1f17cc873f8dc9be691c452196e2f5 and bc3755d86098cad4e523936292cace96c97672d2.
πŸ“’ Files selected for processing (2) * packages/rfq-indexer/indexer/ponder.schema.ts (1 hunks) * packages/rfq-indexer/indexer/src/index.ts (1 hunks)
πŸ”‡ Additional comments (4)
packages/rfq-indexer/indexer/ponder.schema.ts (2)
Line range hint `1-94`: **Summary: Naming convention standardization successfully implemented.** The changes in this file successfully standardize the naming convention for chain-related fields in the `BridgeProofDisputedEvents` table, aligning it with other tables in the schema. This improvement enhances code consistency and readability across the project. --- `88-89`: **LGTM! Consistent naming improvement.** The renaming of `chainId` to `originChainId` and `chain` to `originChain` in the `BridgeProofDisputedEvents` table improves consistency with other event tables in the schema. This change enhances code readability and maintainability. To ensure these changes don't break existing code, please run the following script to check for any references to the old field names: If the script returns any results, those occurrences should be updated to use the new field names.
packages/rfq-indexer/indexer/src/index.ts (2)
`168-169`: **Approved: Improved naming consistency** The renaming of `chainId` to `originChainId` and `chain` to `originChain` enhances the consistency of the codebase. This change aligns the `BridgeProofDisputed` event handler with other handlers in the file, making it clear that these properties refer to the origin chain. Good job on standardizing the naming convention! --- `168-169`: **Verify impact on data consumers** While the renaming improves consistency, it's important to ensure that any code consuming data from the `BridgeProofDisputedEvents` table is updated to use the new property names (`originChainId` and `originChain`). Please verify that all relevant queries or data access points are adjusted accordingly to prevent any potential issues. To help verify this, you can run the following script to search for any usage of the old property names in relation to `BridgeProofDisputedEvents`: This script will search for any occurrences of `BridgeProofDisputedEvents` followed by `chain` (but not `chainId` or `chainChain`) in TypeScript and JavaScript files, excluding the current file. If there are any results, those areas may need to be updated.
βœ… Verification successful **No external usages of old property names found** All consumers of the `BridgeProofDisputedEvents` table are using the updated property names (`originChainId` and `originChain`). No adjustments are necessary.
🏁 Scripts executed The following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Search for potential usage of old property names rg --type typescript --type javascript 'BridgeProofDisputedEvents.*chain(?!Id|Chain)' -g '!**/index.ts' ``` Length of output: 385 --- Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Search for potential usage of old property names using PCRE2 for look-around rg --pcre2 --type typescript --type javascript 'BridgeProofDisputedEvents.*chain(?!Id|Chain)' -g '!**/index.ts' ``` Length of output: 148 --- Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Search for potential usage of old property names using file extensions and PCRE2 rg --pcre2 'BridgeProofDisputedEvents.*chain(?!Id|Chain)' -g '*.ts' -g '*.tsx' -g '*.js' -g '*.jsx' -g '!**/index.ts' ``` Length of output: 119
--- 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?
❀️ Share - [X](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A&url=https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [Mastodon](https://mastodon.social/share?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai) - [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/submit?title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&text=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai&mini=true&title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&summary=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code)
πŸͺ§ Tips ### Chat There are 3 ways to chat with [CodeRabbit](https://coderabbit.ai): - Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example: - `I pushed a fix in commit , please review it.` - `Generate unit testing code for this file.` - `Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.` - Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag `@coderabbitai` in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples: - `@coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.` - `@coderabbitai modularize this function.` - PR comments: Tag `@coderabbitai` in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples: - `@coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.` - `@coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.` - `@coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.` - `@coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.` 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) - `@coderabbitai pause` to pause the reviews on a PR. - `@coderabbitai resume` to resume the paused reviews. - `@coderabbitai review` to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository. - `@coderabbitai full review` to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again. - `@coderabbitai summary` to regenerate the summary of the PR. - `@coderabbitai resolve` resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments. - `@coderabbitai configuration` to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository. - `@coderabbitai help` to get help. ### Other keywords and placeholders - Add `@coderabbitai ignore` anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed. - Add `@coderabbitai summary` to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description. - Add `@coderabbitai` anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically. ### Documentation and Community - Visit our [Documentation](https://coderabbit.ai/docs) for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit. - Join our [Discord Community](http://discord.gg/coderabbit) to get help, request features, and share feedback. - Follow us on [X/Twitter](https://twitter.com/coderabbitai) for updates and announcements.
cloudflare-workers-and-pages[bot] commented 1 month ago

Deploying sanguine-fe with  Cloudflare Pages  Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit: bc3755d
Status: βœ…  Deploy successful!
Preview URL: https://1fd7941a.sanguine-fe.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL: https://feat-rfq-indexer-db-names.sanguine-fe.pages.dev

View logs

codecov[bot] commented 1 month ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 90.43902%. Comparing base (61c2310) to head (bc3755d). Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #3239 +/- ## =================================================== + Coverage 90.24584% 90.43902% +0.19317% =================================================== Files 60 54 -6 Lines 1261 1025 -236 Branches 150 82 -68 =================================================== - Hits 1138 927 -211 + Misses 118 95 -23 + Partials 5 3 -2 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/synapsecns/sanguine/pull/3239/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=synapsecns) | Coverage Ξ” | | |---|---|---| | [packages](https://app.codecov.io/gh/synapsecns/sanguine/pull/3239/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=synapsecns) | `90.43902% <ΓΈ> (ΓΈ)` | | | [solidity](https://app.codecov.io/gh/synapsecns/sanguine/pull/3239/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=synapsecns) | `?` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=synapsecns#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.