Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

refact Next() in mergeiterator.go #22712

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

johson-ll
Copy link
Contributor

@johson-ll johson-ll commented Dec 2, 2024

Description

Closes: #XXXX


Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title, you can find examples of the prefixes below:
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification, including comments for documenting Go code
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

Please see Pull Request Reviewer section in the contributing guide for more information on how to review a pull request.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic, API design and naming, documentation is accurate, tests and test coverage

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes

    • Improved the logic flow in the iterator's Next method, enhancing its reliability and readability.
  • Documentation

    • Updated comments for clarity in the Next method, reflecting the new control flow structure.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 2, 2024

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the Next method of the cacheMergeIterator struct in store/cachekv/internal/mergeiterator.go. The control flow is changed from a switch-case structure to if-else statements, which simplifies the logic for handling the validity of parent and cache iterators. The Key and Value methods remain unchanged, and the comments have been updated for clarity. The overall functionality is preserved while improving code readability.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
store/cachekv/internal/mergeiterator.go Modified the Next method to replace switch-case with if-else statements for iterator validity checks. Updated comments for clarity. Key and Value methods remain unchanged.

Possibly related PRs

  • test(server/v2/stf): Add test for mergeiterator #22141: The changes in this PR introduce a unit test for the MergedIterator, which directly relates to the Next method modifications in the main PR, as both involve iterator functionality and behavior in handling parent and cache states.

Suggested labels

C:server/v2, C:server/v2 stf

Suggested reviewers

  • kocubinski
  • tac0turtle
  • testinginprod

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
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, 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 for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
store/cachekv/internal/mergeiterator.go (3)

53-72: Add documentation for the refactored logic

While the code is more readable now, please add a comment block explaining the three main cases handled by this method:

  1. When parent is invalid
  2. When cache is invalid
  3. When both are valid
 // Next implements Iterator
+// It advances the iterator based on three cases:
+// 1. If parent is invalid, advance the cache iterator
+// 2. If cache is invalid, advance the parent iterator
+// 3. If both are valid, compare their keys and advance accordingly:
+//    - If parent key < cache key: advance parent
+//    - If keys are equal: advance both
+//    - If parent key > cache key: advance cache
 func (iter *cacheMergeIterator) Next() {
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint (1.62.2)

56-56: File is not gci-ed with --skip-generated -s standard -s default -s prefix(cosmossdk.io) -s prefix(github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk) --custom-order

(gci)


56-56: Fix inconsistent spacing in else-if block

There's an inconsistent space before the opening brace in the else-if condition.

-	} else if !iter.cache.Valid(){
+	} else if !iter.cache.Valid() {
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint (1.62.2)

56-56: File is not gci-ed with --skip-generated -s standard -s default -s prefix(cosmossdk.io) -s prefix(github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk) --custom-order

(gci)


59-71: Consider simplifying the comparison logic

The switch statement inside the else block could be simplified to make the code more concise and maintainable.

 	} else {
 		// Both iterators are valid, so we compare their keys
 		keyP, keyC := iter.parent.Key(), iter.cache.Key()
-		switch iter.compare(keyP, keyC) {
-		case -1: // parent < cache
-			iter.parent.Next() // Advance parent
-		case 0: // parent == cache
-			iter.parent.Next() // Advance both iterators, since they are equal
+		cmp := iter.compare(keyP, keyC)
+		if cmp <= 0 { // parent <= cache
+			iter.parent.Next()
+			if cmp == 0 {
+				iter.cache.Next()
+			}
+		} else { // parent > cache
 			iter.cache.Next()
-		case 1: // parent > cache
-			iter.cache.Next() // Advance cache
 		}
 	}
📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e7fe651 and 233403e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • store/cachekv/internal/mergeiterator.go (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
store/cachekv/internal/mergeiterator.go (1)

Pattern **/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.

🪛 golangci-lint (1.62.2)
store/cachekv/internal/mergeiterator.go

56-56: File is not gci-ed with --skip-generated -s standard -s default -s prefix(cosmossdk.io) -s prefix(github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk) --custom-order

(gci)

🔇 Additional comments (1)
store/cachekv/internal/mergeiterator.go (1)

53-72: LGTM: Well-integrated refactoring

The refactored Next() method:

  • Maintains the iterator's contract
  • Preserves the behavior with skipUntilExistsOrInvalid
  • Aligns with the existing error handling through assertValid
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint (1.62.2)

56-56: File is not gci-ed with --skip-generated -s standard -s default -s prefix(cosmossdk.io) -s prefix(github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk) --custom-order

(gci)

Copy link
Member

@julienrbrt julienrbrt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hey! Thanks for this PR but switching a switch statement to an if/else doesn't add anything here.

@julienrbrt julienrbrt closed this Dec 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants