feat: pagination #1490
feat: pagination #1490
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request primarily enhance various classes and methods across the codebase to support pagination. This includes the addition of optional parameters Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Warning Rate limit exceeded@rodrigopavezi has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 11 minutes and 52 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
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 (
|
github-actions
bot
requested review from
aimensahnoun,
leoslr,
MantisClone and
yomarion
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 11
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (22)
packages/request-node/src/request/getChannelsByTopic.ts (2)
Line range hint
15-21: Update method documentation with pagination parametersThe JSDoc comment should be updated to include information about the new pagination parameters.
Consider updating the documentation:
/** * Handles getChannelsByTopic of data-access layer. * * @param clientRequest http client request object + * query parameters: + * - topic: string (required) - Topic to search for + * - updatedBetween: string (optional) - JSON string for date range + * - page: number (optional) - Page number (default: 1) + * - pageSize: number (optional) - Items per page (default: 10) * @param serverResponse http server response object * @param dataAccess data access layer */
Line range hint
24-38: Consider adding response metadata for paginationThe response should include pagination metadata to help clients handle the paginated results effectively.
Consider modifying the response structure to include metadata:
interface PaginatedResponse<T> { data: T[]; pagination: { currentPage: number; pageSize: number; totalItems?: number; totalPages?: number; }; }This would help clients implement features like "next/previous" buttons or page indicators.
packages/data-access/src/combined-data-access.ts (3)
29-32: Consider adding parameter validation and documentationThe pagination implementation looks good, but could benefit from:
- Parameter validation to ensure positive numbers
- JSDoc documentation explaining the pagination behavior and parameter constraints
Add documentation and validation:
+ /** + * Retrieves channels by topic with optional pagination + * @param topic - The topic to filter channels + * @param updatedBetween - Optional timestamp boundaries + * @param page - Optional page number (must be >= 0) + * @param pageSize - Optional page size (must be > 0) + */ async getChannelsByTopic( topic: string, updatedBetween?: DataAccessTypes.ITimestampBoundaries | undefined, page?: number | undefined, pageSize?: number | undefined, ): Promise<DataAccessTypes.IReturnGetChannelsByTopic> { + if (page !== undefined && page < 0) throw new Error('Page must be >= 0'); + if (pageSize !== undefined && pageSize <= 0) throw new Error('Page size must be > 0'); return await this.reader.getChannelsByTopic(topic, updatedBetween, page, pageSize); }
37-40: Consider extracting pagination validation to a shared utilityThe pagination implementation is consistent with
getChannelsByTopic, but to avoid duplication, consider extracting the validation logic into a shared utility function.Create a shared validation utility:
private validatePagination(page?: number, pageSize?: number): void { if (page !== undefined && page < 0) throw new Error('Page must be >= 0'); if (pageSize !== undefined && pageSize <= 0) throw new Error('Page size must be > 0'); }Then use it in both methods:
async getChannelsByMultipleTopics( topics: string[], updatedBetween?: DataAccessTypes.ITimestampBoundaries, page?: number | undefined, pageSize?: number | undefined, ): Promise<DataAccessTypes.IReturnGetChannelsByTopic> { + this.validatePagination(page, pageSize); return await this.reader.getChannelsByMultipleTopics(topics, updatedBetween, page, pageSize); }
29-41: Well-structured pagination implementationThe pagination implementation follows good architectural practices:
- Maintains the separation between read and write operations
- Properly extends the data access interface
- Correctly delegates pagination to the underlying reader implementation
- Consistent parameter handling across methods
Consider documenting the pagination strategy in the README or architecture documentation to help other developers understand:
- The default page size if not specified
- How to handle the last page
- Performance implications for large result sets
packages/types/src/transaction-types.ts (2)
19-20: Consider adding type constraints for pagination parameters.While the pagination parameters are correctly typed as optional numbers, consider adding constraints to ensure valid values:
pageshould be a positive integerpageSizeshould have a minimum and maximum limit- page?: number, - pageSize?: number, + page?: number & { __brand: 'PositiveInteger' }, + pageSize?: number & { __brand: 'PageSize' } & { min: 1; max: 100 },This would help prevent potential issues with invalid pagination values at compile-time.
19-20: Consider adding JSDoc comments for pagination parameters.Since this is an interface that will be implemented by multiple classes, it would be helpful to add documentation about:
- Expected behavior when pagination parameters are omitted
- How implementations should handle invalid values
- Whether results should be consistent across pages
- Recommended default page size
Example documentation:
/** * @param page Optional page number (1-based). If omitted, returns all results. * @param pageSize Optional number of items per page (default: 20, max: 100). * @throws {Error} If page or pageSize are invalid. */Also applies to: 25-26
packages/types/src/data-access-types.ts (2)
16-17: LGTM! Consider adding parameter validation.The pagination parameters are correctly typed and maintain backward compatibility. However, consider adding JSDoc comments to document the expected parameter ranges and behavior.
Add documentation for the pagination parameters:
getChannelsByTopic: ( topic: string, updatedBetween?: ITimestampBoundaries, + /** @param page Zero-based page number. Must be >= 0. */ page?: number, + /** @param pageSize Number of items per page. Must be > 0. */ pageSize?: number, ) => Promise<IReturnGetChannelsByTopic>;Also applies to: 22-23
Line range hint
89-98: Add pagination metadata to the return type.The
IReturnGetChannelsByTopicinterface should include pagination metadata to help clients handle paginated responses effectively.Add pagination metadata to the interface:
export interface IReturnGetChannelsByTopic { /** meta information */ meta: { /** location of the transactions (follow the position of the result.transactions) */ transactionsStorageLocation: { [key: string]: string[]; }; /** meta-data from the layer below */ storageMeta?: Record<string, StorageTypes.IEntryMetadata[] | undefined>; + /** pagination metadata */ + pagination?: { + /** total number of items across all pages */ + totalItems: number; + /** total number of pages */ + totalPages: number; + /** current page number (zero-based) */ + currentPage: number; + /** number of items per page */ + pageSize: number; + }; }; /** result of the execution: the transactions grouped by channel id */ result: { transactions: ITransactionsByChannelIds }; }packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts (1)
52-55: LGTM! Consider adding JSDoc comments.The pagination parameters are correctly implemented and maintain backward compatibility. However, adding JSDoc comments would improve the API documentation.
Add documentation for the new parameters:
+ /** + * Get channels by topic with optional pagination + * @param topic - The topic to search for + * @param updatedBetween - Optional timestamp boundaries + * @param page - Optional page number (0-based) + * @param pageSize - Optional number of items per page + * @returns Promise resolving to channels matching the topic + */packages/types/src/storage-types.ts (1)
Line range hint
21-24: Consider enhancing IGetTransactionsResponse with pagination metadata.To fully support pagination throughout the system, the response type should include metadata such as total count, current page, etc. This would help clients implement proper pagination UI and navigation.
Consider updating the type as follows:
export type IGetTransactionsResponse = { transactions: IIndexedTransaction[]; blockNumber: number; + pagination?: { + totalCount: number; + currentPage: number; + pageSize: number; + totalPages: number; + }; };packages/transaction-manager/src/transaction-manager.ts (3)
189-197: Update JSDoc comments to document pagination parameters.The method signature has been updated with pagination parameters, but the JSDoc comments haven't been updated to reflect these changes. Please update the documentation to include:
@param page- Document the purpose and default value@param pageSize- Document the purpose and default valueConsider adding parameter validation.
The pagination parameters should be validated to ensure they contain reasonable values:
pageshould be a positive integerpageSizeshould be a positive integer within acceptable boundsExample validation:
public async getChannelsByTopic( topic: string, updatedBetween?: TransactionTypes.ITimestampBoundaries, page?: number, pageSize?: number, ): Promise<TransactionTypes.IReturnGetTransactionsByChannels> { + if (page !== undefined && (page < 0 || !Number.isInteger(page))) { + throw new Error('Page must be a non-negative integer'); + } + if (pageSize !== undefined && (pageSize <= 0 || !Number.isInteger(pageSize))) { + throw new Error('Page size must be a positive integer'); + } const resultGetTx = await this.dataAccess.getChannelsByTopic( topic, updatedBetween, page, pageSize, );
212-220: Update JSDoc comments to document pagination parameters.Similar to
getChannelsByTopic, the JSDoc comments need to be updated to include the new pagination parameters:
@param page- Document the purpose and default value@param pageSize- Document the purpose and default valueConsider extracting pagination parameter validation.
To avoid code duplication, consider extracting the pagination parameter validation into a shared utility function that can be used by both
getChannelsByTopicandgetChannelsByMultipleTopics.Example:
private validatePaginationParams(page?: number, pageSize?: number): void { if (page !== undefined && (page < 0 || !Number.isInteger(page))) { throw new Error('Page must be a non-negative integer'); } if (pageSize !== undefined && (pageSize <= 0 || !Number.isInteger(pageSize))) { throw new Error('Page size must be a positive integer'); } }Then use it in both methods:
public async getChannelsByMultipleTopics( topics: string[], updatedBetween?: TransactionTypes.ITimestampBoundaries, page?: number, pageSize?: number, ): Promise<TransactionTypes.IReturnGetTransactionsByChannels> { + this.validatePaginationParams(page, pageSize); const resultGetTx = await this.dataAccess.getChannelsByMultipleTopics( topics, updatedBetween, page, pageSize, );
Line range hint
189-220: Consider adding pagination metadata to the return type.To improve the API's usability, consider adding pagination metadata to the return type. This would help clients understand:
- The total number of items available
- The current page number
- The number of items per page
- Whether there are more items available
Example enhancement:
interface IPaginationMeta { total: number; page: number; pageSize: number; hasMore: boolean; } // Update the return type to include pagination metadata interface IReturnGetTransactionsByChannels { meta: { dataAccessMeta: any; ignoredTransactions: Record<string, any>; pagination?: IPaginationMeta; // Optional to maintain backward compatibility }; result: { transactions: Record<string, any>; }; }packages/types/src/request-logic-types.ts (2)
64-65: Consider adding parameter constraints and documentation.While the pagination parameters have been correctly added, consider:
- Adding JSDoc comments to document the parameters' purpose and constraints
- Adding validation for the parameter ranges (e.g.,
pagestarts from 0 or 1, minimum/maximumpageSize)Add documentation and type constraints:
getRequestsByTopic: ( topic: any, updatedBetween?: ITimestampBoundaries, - page?: number, - pageSize?: number, + /** Zero-based page number for pagination */ + page?: number & { __brand: 'NonNegativeInteger' }, + /** Number of items per page (min: 1, max: 100) */ + pageSize?: number & { __brand: 'PageSize' }, ) => Promise<IReturnGetRequestsByTopic>;Similar changes should be applied to
getRequestsByMultipleTopics.Also applies to: 70-71
Line range hint
119-121: Consider enhancing the return type for pagination metadata.The
IReturnGetRequestsByTopicinterface should be enhanced to include pagination metadata such as total count, current page, etc.Add pagination metadata to the return type:
/** return of the function getRequestsByTopic */ export interface IReturnGetRequestsByTopic extends IRequestLogicReturn { - result: { requests: Array<{ request: IRequest | null; pending: IPendingRequest | null }> }; + result: { + requests: Array<{ request: IRequest | null; pending: IPendingRequest | null }>; + pagination: { + /** Total number of items across all pages */ + totalCount: number; + /** Current page number (zero-based) */ + page: number; + /** Number of items per page */ + pageSize: number; + /** Total number of pages */ + totalPages: number; + }; + }; }packages/request-client.js/test/api/request-network.test.ts (3)
145-152: Add test cases for pagination edge casesWhile the basic pagination test is good, consider adding test cases for:
- Default values when pagination object is not provided
- Edge cases like page=0, negative page numbers, or very large page sizes
- Behavior when results are empty or have fewer items than pageSize
265-272: Consider reducing test duplicationThe pagination test cases for
fromMultipleIdentitiesduplicate the same values used infromIdentity. Consider:
- Creating shared test cases for pagination
- Using test parameters to reuse pagination scenarios across different methods
- Adding a test helper function for pagination assertions
This would make the tests more maintainable and ensure consistent coverage across methods.
Example approach:
const paginationTestCases = [ { name: 'basic pagination', params: { page: 1, pageSize: 10 } }, { name: 'default values', params: undefined }, { name: 'edge case - empty page', params: { page: 999, pageSize: 10 } } ]; describe.each(paginationTestCases)('pagination: $name', ({ params }) => { it('works with fromIdentity', async () => { // Test fromIdentity with params }); it('works with fromMultipleIdentities', async () => { // Test fromMultipleIdentities with same params }); });
Line range hint
292-334: Add missing pagination testsThe test suites for
fromTopicandfromMultipleTopicsdon't include pagination tests, while similar methods likefromIdentityandfromMultipleIdentitiesdo. Please add pagination test coverage for these methods to ensure consistent behavior across all paginated endpoints.packages/request-client.js/src/api/request-network.ts (1)
268-273: Consider adding parameter validation and documentationTo improve robustness and usability:
- Add validation for pagination parameters to prevent negative values
- Document the pagination behavior:
- Whether page numbers are zero-based or one-based
- Default values when parameters are omitted
- Maximum allowed page size
Example implementation:
+ /** + * Validates pagination parameters + * @param page Page number (1-based) + * @param pageSize Number of items per page (max: 100) + * @throws Error if parameters are invalid + */ + private validatePaginationParams(page?: number, pageSize?: number): void { + if (page !== undefined && page < 1) { + throw new Error('Page number must be greater than or equal to 1'); + } + if (pageSize !== undefined) { + if (pageSize < 1) { + throw new Error('Page size must be greater than or equal to 1'); + } + if (pageSize > 100) { + throw new Error('Page size cannot exceed 100'); + } + } + }Then call this method at the start of each pagination-enabled method:
public async fromTopic( topic: any, updatedBetween?: Types.ITimestampBoundaries, options?: { disablePaymentDetection?: boolean; disableEvents?: boolean; page?: number; pageSize?: number; }, ): Promise<Request[]> { + this.validatePaginationParams(options?.page, options?.pageSize);Also applies to: 291-296, 319-324, 381-386
packages/request-logic/src/request-logic.ts (2)
349-350: Consider adding parameter validation for pagination.The implementation correctly forwards pagination parameters to the transaction manager, maintaining backward compatibility with optional parameters. However, consider adding validation to ensure
pageandpageSizeare positive numbers when provided.public async getRequestsByTopic( topic: string, updatedBetween?: RequestLogicTypes.ITimestampBoundaries, page?: number, pageSize?: number, ): Promise<RequestLogicTypes.IReturnGetRequestsByTopic> { + if (page !== undefined && page < 0) { + throw new Error('Page must be a non-negative number'); + } + if (pageSize !== undefined && pageSize <= 0) { + throw new Error('Page size must be a positive number'); + } // hash all the topics const hashedTopic = MultiFormat.serialize(normalizeKeccak256Hash(topic));Also applies to: 358-359
372-373: Consider adding JSDoc for pagination parameters.The implementation correctly forwards pagination parameters to the transaction manager. However, the method's JSDoc comment should be updated to document the new parameters.
/** * Gets the requests indexed by multiple topics from the transactions of transaction-manager layer * + * @param topics Array of topics to filter requests + * @param updatedBetween Optional timestamp boundaries for filtering + * @param page Optional page number for pagination (0-based) + * @param pageSize Optional number of items per page * @returns all the requests indexed by topics */Also applies to: 383-384
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (17)
packages/data-access/src/combined-data-access.ts(1 hunks)packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts(1 hunks)packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts(1 hunks)packages/request-client.js/src/api/request-network.ts(4 hunks)packages/request-client.js/src/http-data-access.ts(2 hunks)packages/request-client.js/test/api/request-network.test.ts(4 hunks)packages/request-logic/src/request-logic.ts(3 hunks)packages/request-node/src/request/getChannelsByTopic.ts(2 hunks)packages/request-node/test/getChannelsByTopic.test.ts(1 hunks)packages/thegraph-data-access/src/queries.ts(1 hunks)packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts(1 hunks)packages/transaction-manager/src/transaction-manager.ts(2 hunks)packages/transaction-manager/test/index.test.ts(7 hunks)packages/types/src/data-access-types.ts(1 hunks)packages/types/src/request-logic-types.ts(1 hunks)packages/types/src/storage-types.ts(1 hunks)packages/types/src/transaction-types.ts(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (12)
packages/thegraph-data-access/src/queries.ts (1)
80-85:
Pagination implementation may not effectively limit transaction data.
While the pagination parameters (first and skip) are correctly applied to the channels query, the nested transactions query doesn't implement pagination. This means that for each channel, ALL transactions will be returned, which could still lead to performance issues when channels have many transactions.
Consider modifying the query to paginate both channels and their transactions:
-query GetTransactionsByTopics($topics: [String!]!, $first: Int!, $skip: Int!) {
+query GetTransactionsByTopics(
+ $topics: [String!]!,
+ $channelsFirst: Int!,
+ $channelsSkip: Int!,
+ $transactionsFirst: Int!,
+ $transactionsSkip: Int!
+) {
${metaQueryBody}
channels(
where: { topics_contains: $topics }
- first: $first
- skip: $skip
+ first: $channelsFirst
+ skip: $channelsSkip
){
transactions(
orderBy: blockTimestamp,
- orderDirection: asc
+ orderDirection: asc,
+ first: $transactionsFirst,
+ skip: $transactionsSkip
) {
...TransactionsBody
}
}
}Let's verify if the subgraph schema supports pagination for nested transactions:
packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts (1)
53-59: Verify GraphQL query structure and performance implications
The pagination implementation looks good, but let's verify:
- The GraphQL query structure changes
- The performance impact with large datasets
✅ Verification successful
GraphQL query structure and pagination implementation verified
The implementation is correctly structured with proper pagination support:
- The GraphQL query
GetTransactionsByTopicsincludes required pagination parameters (first,skip) - The pagination logic in
subgraph-client.tscorrectly calculates theskipvalue based onpageandpageSize - The query includes proper ordering (
orderBy: blockTimestamp, orderDirection: asc) to ensure consistent pagination - There's a
MAX_INT_VALUEconstant defined to handle pagination limits
Performance considerations are adequately addressed through:
- The use of GraphQL-level pagination (using
firstandskip) which pushes the pagination logic to the database layer - Proper parameter passing from the client interface to the GraphQL query
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify GraphQL query structure and potential performance implications
# Check if GetTransactionsByTopics query includes pagination parameters
echo "Checking GetTransactionsByTopics query structure..."
rg -A 10 "GetTransactionsByTopics\s*=\s*`" packages/thegraph-data-access/src/queries.ts
# Look for any existing pagination-related performance tests
echo "Checking for pagination performance tests..."
rg -l "test.*pagination.*performance" packages/thegraph-data-access/test/
Length of output: 206
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to check the GraphQL query structure
# Check GetTransactionsByTopics query definition
echo "Checking GetTransactionsByTopics query structure..."
rg -A 10 "GetTransactionsByTopics" packages/thegraph-data-access/src/
# Look for any pagination-related tests
echo "Checking for pagination tests..."
rg -l "test.*pagination" packages/thegraph-data-access/test/
# Check for any performance-related configurations or limits
echo "Checking for performance configurations..."
rg "pageSize|limit|first" packages/thegraph-data-access/src/
Length of output: 3883
packages/types/src/transaction-types.ts (1)
25-26: LGTM! Consistent with getChannelsByTopic.
The pagination parameters are consistently implemented across both methods, which is good for maintainability.
The same type constraints suggested for getChannelsByTopic should be applied here.
packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts (1)
58-66: Verify pagination implementation across the system
The pagination implementation here needs to be consistent with other parts of the system mentioned in the PR objectives.
Let's verify the pagination implementation across related files:
✅ Verification successful
Pagination implementation is consistent across the system
The pagination implementation in in-memory-indexer.ts is consistent with the rest of the system. The evidence shows:
- All related methods (
getTransactionsByTopics,getChannelsByTopic,getChannelsByMultipleTopics) consistently acceptpageandpageSizeparameters - The pagination calculation
(page - 1) * pageSizeis implemented consistently:- In-memory implementation:
channelIds.slice((page - 1) * pageSize, page * pageSize) - TheGraph implementation:
skip = page && pageSize ? (page - 1) * pageSize : 0
- In-memory implementation:
- The pagination parameters are properly propagated through the entire call chain:
- HTTP layer (
request-node) - Business logic layer (
request-logic) - Data access layer (
data-access) - Storage implementations (in-memory and TheGraph)
- HTTP layer (
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check pagination implementation consistency across the system
# Check for pagination parameters in related files
echo "Checking pagination parameters in related files..."
rg -A 5 "getTransactionsByTopics|getChannelsByTopic|getChannelsByMultipleTopics" --type typescript
# Check for IGetTransactionsResponse interface usage
echo "Checking response interface usage..."
ast-grep --pattern 'interface $name extends StorageTypes.IGetTransactionsResponse {
$$$
}'
# Check for pagination-related types
echo "Checking pagination-related types..."
rg -A 10 "interface.*Pagination|type.*Pagination" --type typescript
Length of output: 612
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try with different file extensions and commands
# Search for pagination-related methods
echo "Checking pagination in TypeScript/JavaScript files..."
rg -t js -t ts "getTransactionsByTopics|getChannelsByTopic|getChannelsByMultipleTopics" -A 5
# Look for pagination interfaces and types
echo "Checking pagination types..."
rg -t js -t ts "interface.*Pagination|type.*Pagination"
# Search for page/pageSize parameters
echo "Checking pagination parameter usage..."
rg -t js -t ts "page.*pageSize" -A 3
# Look for slice operations related to pagination
echo "Checking slice operations..."
rg -t js -t ts "slice\(\(.*page.*\).*pageSize"
Length of output: 56202
packages/types/src/storage-types.ts (1)
56-60: LGTM! Pagination parameters added correctly.
The optional pagination parameters follow standard patterns and maintain backward compatibility.
packages/request-client.js/src/http-data-access.ts (1)
Line range hint 1-1: Consider implementing a consistent pagination strategy across all methods.
The PR objective mentions implementing pagination throughout the system, but only channel-related methods have been updated. Consider:
- Adding pagination to
getTransactionsByChannelIdfor consistency - Implementing a common pagination interface
- Documenting the pagination strategy in the class-level JSDoc
Let's verify the pagination implementation in related files:
packages/types/src/request-logic-types.ts (1)
64-71: Verify the impact on existing implementations.
The addition of optional pagination parameters requires verification of all implementations of the IRequestLogic interface.
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different search strategy to find the implementations.
All implementations correctly handle the new pagination parameters
Based on the search results, I can verify that all implementations of the interface properly handle the new optional pagination parameters:
-
Main implementation in
packages/request-logic/src/request-logic.ts:getRequestsByTopicimplements all parameters: topic, updatedBetween, page, pageSizegetRequestsByMultipleTopicsimplements all parameters: topics, updatedBetween, page, pageSize
-
Client implementation in
packages/request-client.js/src/api/request-network.ts:- Both methods correctly pass through the pagination parameters via options object
-
Test implementations in
packages/request-client.js/test/api/request.test.tsare mock implementations that don't need the parameters as they just return empty results for testing purposes.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all implementations of IRequestLogic interface to verify they handle the new parameters
# Search for class implementations
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ implements IRequestLogic {
$$$
}'
# Search for method implementations
ast-grep --pattern 'getRequestsByTopic($$$) {
$$$
}'
ast-grep --pattern 'getRequestsByMultipleTopics($$$) {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 189
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for files containing IRequestLogic interface usage
rg -l "IRequestLogic"
# Search for the method names to find implementations
rg "getRequestsByTopic" -A 5
rg "getRequestsByMultipleTopics" -A 5
Length of output: 10206
packages/request-client.js/test/api/request-network.test.ts (2)
98-103: LGTM: Interface changes align with pagination requirements
The addition of optional pagination parameters (page, pageSize) and updatedBetween to getChannelsByTopic correctly implements the interface needed for paginated queries.
216-221: LGTM: Consistent pagination implementation
The pagination parameters for getChannelsByMultipleTopics are consistently implemented, matching the pattern used in getChannelsByTopic.
packages/request-client.js/src/api/request-network.ts (2)
268-273: LGTM: Consistent pagination parameter additions
The pagination parameters (page and pageSize) have been consistently added to all relevant method signatures while maintaining backward compatibility.
Also applies to: 291-296, 319-324, 381-386
328-333: LGTM: Pagination parameters correctly passed to underlying methods
The pagination parameters are properly forwarded to the respective requestLogic methods.
Also applies to: 390-395
packages/request-logic/src/request-logic.ts (1)
349-350: Verify pagination implementation in dependent components.
The changes align with the PR objectives to implement pagination. However, we should verify that:
- The transaction manager properly implements pagination
- The UI components correctly handle paginated responses
- The API documentation is updated to reflect these changes
Also applies to: 358-359, 372-373, 383-384
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts (2)
53-54: LGTM: Method signature follows pagination conventions.
The optional parameters maintain backward compatibility while enabling pagination functionality as intended.
56-61: Skip comment: Validation already addressed.
The implemented validation matches the previous review suggestion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts (1)
58-68: Enhance input validation for pagination parametersWhile the basic validation is good, consider adding integer checks to ensure robust input handling.
if (page !== undefined && page < 1) { + if (!Number.isInteger(page)) { + throw new Error('Page must be an integer'); + } throw new Error('Page must be greater than or equal to 1'); } if (pageSize !== undefined && pageSize <= 0) { + if (!Number.isInteger(pageSize)) { + throw new Error('Page size must be an integer'); + } throw new Error('Page size must be greater than 0'); }packages/transaction-manager/test/index.test.ts (1)
1129-1134: Consider removing explicit undefined parameters for better readability.The test cases have been updated to include
undefinedparameters for pagination, but this makes the code less readable. Since these tests don't test pagination functionality, consider removing the explicitundefinedparameters.Apply this pattern across all similar test cases:
-expect(fakeDataAccess.getChannelsByTopic).toHaveBeenCalledWith( - extraTopics[0], - undefined, - undefined, - undefined, -); +expect(fakeDataAccess.getChannelsByTopic).toHaveBeenCalledWith(extraTopics[0]);Also applies to: 1197-1202, 1271-1276, 1358-1363, 1416-1421, 1494-1499
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts(3 hunks)packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts(1 hunks)packages/request-client.js/src/http-data-access.ts(2 hunks)packages/transaction-manager/test/index.test.ts(7 hunks)packages/types/src/data-access-types.ts(3 hunks)packages/types/src/storage-types.ts(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
- packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts
- packages/request-client.js/src/http-data-access.ts
- packages/types/src/data-access-types.ts
- packages/types/src/storage-types.ts
🔇 Additional comments (1)
packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts (1)
58-62: Verify pagination consistency across the system
As part of the system-wide pagination implementation, ensure that the pagination parameters are consistently handled across all related components (request-client, request-node, and subgraph queries).
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can now provide a final response about the pagination implementation:
Pagination implementation is consistent across the system
The pagination parameters (page and pageSize) are consistently implemented across the data access layer:
packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.tsimplements pagination with proper validationpackages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.tsvalidates page size > 0packages/request-client.js/src/http-data-access.tsvalidates page size > 0- Storage types (
packages/types/src/storage-types.tsandpackages/types/src/data-access-types.ts) consistently define the pagination interface withpageSizeparameter
The implementation in getTransactionsByTopics follows the established pagination pattern used throughout the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistent pagination parameter usage across the codebase
# Check for pagination parameter usage in related files
echo "Checking pagination parameter usage..."
rg -A 2 "page\?: number.*pageSize\?: number" --type typescript
# Check for pagination metadata interface usage
echo "Checking pagination metadata usage..."
rg -A 5 "pagination.*total.*page.*pageSize" --type typescript
# Check for potential inconsistencies in parameter names
echo "Checking for pagination parameter naming inconsistencies..."
rg "(limit|offset|size|per_page|perPage)" --type typescript
Length of output: 596
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try without typescript file type specification since it's not recognized
# Check for pagination parameter usage in related files
echo "Checking pagination parameter usage..."
rg -A 2 "page\?: number.*pageSize\?: number"
# Check for pagination metadata usage
echo "Checking pagination metadata usage..."
rg -A 5 "pagination.*total.*page.*pageSize"
# Check for potential inconsistencies in parameter names
echo "Checking for pagination parameter naming inconsistencies..."
rg "(limit|offset|size|per_page|perPage)"
# Also check for files that might contain pagination-related code
echo "Checking for pagination-related files..."
fd -e ts -e js | grep -i "pagination\|page"
Length of output: 29214
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts (1)
21-24: Consider making pagination configuration more flexibleThe hardcoded pagination values could be made configurable through the constructor to allow different use cases and environments to adjust these values as needed.
export class SubgraphClient implements StorageTypes.IIndexer { private graphql: GraphQLClient; public readonly endpoint: string; - private readonly DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE = 10; - private readonly MAX_PAGE_SIZE = 100; + private readonly DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE: number; + private readonly MAX_PAGE_SIZE: number; - constructor(endpoint: string, options?: RequestConfig) { + constructor( + endpoint: string, + options?: RequestConfig & { + defaultPageSize?: number; + maxPageSize?: number; + } + ) { this.endpoint = endpoint; this.graphql = new GraphQLClient(endpoint, options); + this.DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE = options?.defaultPageSize ?? 10; + this.MAX_PAGE_SIZE = options?.maxPageSize ?? 100; }packages/transaction-manager/test/index.test.ts (2)
1520-1575: Enhance pagination test coverage further.The current pagination tests provide good coverage of basic functionality and edge cases. Consider adding these additional test cases:
- Verify consistent sorting order across pages
- Ensure no duplicate items between pages
- Test concurrent pagination requests
Example test case for sorting and duplicates:
it('should maintain consistent sorting and avoid duplicates across pages', async () => { const transactionManager = new TransactionManager(fakeDataAccess); // Get all pages const page1 = await transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 1, 2); const page2 = await transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 2, 2); const page3 = await transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 3, 2); // Verify sorting (assuming timestamp-based sorting) const allTransactions = [...page1.result.transactions, ...page2.result.transactions, ...page3.result.transactions]; expect(allTransactions).toEqual([tx, tx2, tx3, tx4, tx5]); // Verify no duplicates const uniqueTransactions = new Set(allTransactions.map(t => t.timestamp)); expect(uniqueTransactions.size).toBe(allTransactions.length); }); it('should handle concurrent pagination requests consistently', async () => { const transactionManager = new TransactionManager(fakeDataAccess); // Make concurrent requests for different pages const [page1, page2] = await Promise.all([ transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 1, 2), transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 2, 2) ]); expect(page1.result.transactions).toEqual([tx, tx2]); expect(page2.result.transactions).toEqual([tx3, tx4]); });
1605-1620: Add comprehensive test cases for multiple topics pagination.While the basic pagination test is good, consider adding:
- Content verification for returned transactions
- Edge cases similar to single topic tests
- Tests for different topic combinations
Example enhancement:
it('should handle pagination comprehensively for multiple topics', async () => { const transactionManager = new TransactionManager(fakeDataAccess); // Test first page with content verification const page1 = await transactionManager.getChannelsByMultipleTopics( [extraTopics[0], extraTopics[1]], undefined, 1, 2 ); expect(page1.result.transactions).toEqual([tx, tx2]); expect(page1.meta.pagination).toEqual({ currentPage: 1, pageSize: 2, totalItems: 5, totalPages: 3 }); // Test edge cases const emptyResult = await transactionManager.getChannelsByMultipleTopics( ['nonexistent1', 'nonexistent2'], undefined, 1, 10 ); expect(emptyResult.result.transactions).toHaveLength(0); // Test different topic combinations const mixedTopics = await transactionManager.getChannelsByMultipleTopics( [extraTopics[0], 'nonexistent'], undefined, 1, 2 ); expect(mixedTopics.result.transactions).toHaveLength(2); });
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts(3 hunks)packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts(1 hunks)packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts(2 hunks)packages/transaction-manager/test/index.test.ts(8 hunks)packages/types/src/storage-types.ts(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts
- packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts
- packages/types/src/storage-types.ts
🔇 Additional comments (4)
packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts (2)
60-68: LGTM! Comprehensive parameter validation
The validation logic is thorough and includes appropriate checks for:
- Page number >= 1
- Page size > 0
- Page size <= MAX_PAGE_SIZE
76-80: Verify GraphQL query compatibility
Let's ensure the GetTransactionsByTopics query in queries.ts supports the pagination parameters.
✅ Verification successful
The search results show that the GetTransactionsByTopics query in queries.ts properly defines and uses the pagination parameters ($first and $skip). The query signature matches exactly with the parameters being passed in subgraph-client.ts, and the parameters are correctly applied to the channels query field. Therefore, I can generate the final response:
GraphQL query pagination parameters verified ✓
The GetTransactionsByTopics query correctly supports the pagination parameters:
- Query signature includes
$first: Int!and$skip: Int! - Parameters are properly applied to the
channelsquery field - Usage in
subgraph-client.tsmatches the query definition
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if GetTransactionsByTopics query includes pagination parameters
# Search for the query definition
rg "GetTransactionsByTopics.*\{" -A 10 --type ts
# Or use AST-based search
ast-grep --pattern 'query GetTransactionsByTopics($topics: [String!]!, $first: Int!, $skip: Int!) {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 1781
packages/transaction-manager/test/index.test.ts (2)
30-46: LGTM: Test data declarations are well-structured.
The new test data objects (tx3, tx4, tx5) follow consistent patterns and are properly typed.
1147-1152: LGTM: Method calls correctly updated for pagination support.
The existing test cases have been properly updated to include pagination parameters (undefined) while maintaining their original test objectives.
Also applies to: 1215-1220, 1289-1294, 1376-1381, 1434-1439, 1512-1517
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts (2)
21-24: Consider increasing the DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZEA default page size of 10 might be too small for a GraphQL API, potentially leading to more network requests than necessary. Consider increasing it to 25 or 50 to balance between response size and number of requests.
- private readonly DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE = 10; + private readonly DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE = 25;
91-96: Align pagination field names with GraphQL conventionsConsider using more GraphQL-conventional names for pagination fields.
pagination: { page: effectivePage, pageSize: effectivePageSize, - total: indexedTransactions.length, - hasMore: skip + effectivePageSize < indexedTransactions.length, + totalCount: indexedTransactions.length, + hasNextPage: skip + effectivePageSize < indexedTransactions.length, },
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
packages/thegraph-data-access/src/subgraph-client.ts (2)
57-58: LGTM! Parameter additions align with pagination requirements
The optional pagination parameters follow good API design practices.
70-73: Verify GraphQL schema compatibility
Let's verify that the GraphQL schema supports the pagination parameters as implemented.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the results, I can generate the final response as we have clear evidence that the GraphQL schema is compatible with the pagination implementation.
GraphQL schema compatibility verified ✓
The GetTransactionsByTopics query in queries.ts correctly defines the required pagination parameters:
$first: Int!matches theeffectivePageSizeusage$skip: Int!matches the calculatedskipvalue- Both parameters are properly used in the channels query
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the GetTransactionsByTopics query in queries.ts matches the implementation
# Search for the query definition
rg "GetTransactionsByTopics.*\{" -A 5 --type ts
# Check if the query includes first and skip parameters
ast-grep --pattern 'query GetTransactionsByTopics($topics: [String!]!, $first: Int!, $skip: Int!) {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 1036
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
packages/types/src/data-access-types.ts (1)
76-81: Document page number convention in PaginationMetadataThe interface should specify whether page numbers are zero-based or one-based to ensure consistent implementation across the codebase.
Add JSDoc comment to clarify the convention:
interface PaginationMetadata { total: number; // Total number of items available - page?: number; // Current page number if pagination was used + /** Current page number if pagination was used (1-based indexing) */ + page?: number; pageSize?: number; // Page size if pagination was used hasMore: boolean; // Whether there are more items available }packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts (2)
87-107: Consider adding detailed comments explaining the pagination adjustment logic.While the implementation is correct, the complex calculations for
adjustedPageandadjustedPageSizewould benefit from additional documentation explaining:
- Why we need to adjust pagination when pending items are present
- How the calculations ensure consistent page sizes
- The purpose of each mathematical operation
109-117: Consider adding error handling for the storage query.While the implementation is correct, consider adding try-catch blocks around the storage query to handle potential failures gracefully.
+ try { const result = await this.storage.getTransactionsByTopics( topics, adjustedPage, adjustedPageSize, ); + } catch (error) { + throw new Error(`Failed to fetch transactions: ${error.message}`); + }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts(3 hunks)packages/types/src/data-access-types.ts(4 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
packages/types/src/data-access-types.ts (1)
16-17: Verify consistent pagination implementation across the system
Let's verify that the pagination parameters and metadata are consistently implemented across the request-client, request-node, and subgraph queries.
Also applies to: 22-23, 76-81, 91-91, 107-107
✅ Verification successful
Based on the verification results, I can now provide a final response:
Pagination implementation is consistent across the system
The verification shows that:
- Types are properly defined with pagination parameters (
page,pageSize) and metadata inpackages/types/src/data-access-types.ts - The request-client implementation correctly passes pagination parameters in
getChannelsByTopicandgetChannelsByMultipleTopicsmethods - The data access layer (
combined-data-access.ts) properly handles pagination parameters throughout the chain - Return types include
PaginationMetadatain their meta information
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistent pagination implementation across the system
# Check for pagination parameters in request-client
echo "Checking request-client implementation..."
rg -A 5 "getChannelsByTopic|getChannelsByMultipleTopics|getTransactionsByChannelId" packages/request-client.js/src/
# Check for pagination in request-node endpoints
echo "Checking request-node endpoints..."
rg -A 5 "getTransactionsByChannelId" packages/request-node/src/
# Check for pagination in subgraph queries
echo "Checking subgraph queries..."
rg -A 5 "query.*\{" packages/smart-contracts/src/subgraph/
Length of output: 9208
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the implementation of pagination in more detail
# Check for pagination-related types and interfaces
echo "Checking pagination types..."
rg -A 10 "interface.*Return" packages/types/src/
# Check for pagination implementation in request-node handlers
echo "Checking request-node handlers..."
rg -A 10 "class GetChannelsByTopic" packages/request-node/src/request/
# Check for pagination parameters in data access implementations
echo "Checking data access implementations..."
rg -A 10 "getChannelsByTopic.*page" packages/*/src/
Length of output: 9236
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts (2)
52-55: LGTM: Method signature changes are well-implemented.
The addition of optional pagination parameters aligns with the PR objectives and maintains backward compatibility.
64-70: LGTM: Pagination parameter validation is properly implemented.
The validation logic ensures:
- Page numbers start from 1
- Page size must be positive
This aligns with the previously agreed-upon validation requirements.
rodrigopavezi
requested review from
alexandre-abrioux
and removed request for
yomarion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts (1)
87-107: Consider adding documentation for pagination adjustment logicWhile the implementation is correct, the complex pagination adjustment logic would benefit from additional documentation explaining:
- The purpose of
pendingItemsInPreviousPages- The calculation of
adjustedPageandadjustedPageSize- Edge cases being handled
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts(3 hunks)packages/types/src/data-access-types.ts(3 hunks)packages/types/src/storage-types.ts(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- packages/types/src/data-access-types.ts
- packages/types/src/storage-types.ts
🔇 Additional comments (4)
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts (4)
52-55: LGTM: Method signature changes maintain backward compatibility
The addition of optional pagination parameters is well-implemented, maintaining backward compatibility while extending functionality.
64-70: Validation implementation matches requirements
The validation logic correctly enforces that page numbers start from 1 and page size must be positive.
109-117: LGTM: Transaction fetching and combination is well-implemented
The code correctly:
- Uses adjusted pagination parameters for fetching
- Combines pending and stored transactions in the right order
155-163: LGTM: Pagination metadata follows the standard implementation
The pagination metadata correctly includes:
- Total count
- Current page and page size
- hasMore flag calculated using the standard pattern
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
packages/transaction-manager/test/index.test.ts (1)
1520-1568: Good test coverage for pagination, consider adding a few more cases.The pagination test cases provide good coverage of basic functionality and edge cases. However, consider adding:
- Tests verifying pagination metadata (total count, total pages)
- Tests for concurrent pagination requests to ensure thread safety
Example test case for pagination metadata:
+it('should return correct pagination metadata', async () => { + const transactionManager = new TransactionManager(fakeDataAccess); + const result = await transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 1, 2); + + expect(result.meta.pagination).toEqual({ + currentPage: 1, + pageSize: 2, + totalItems: 5, + totalPages: 3 + }); +}); + +it('should handle concurrent pagination requests correctly', async () => { + const transactionManager = new TransactionManager(fakeDataAccess); + + const results = await Promise.all([ + transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 1, 2), + transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 2, 2), + transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 3, 2) + ]); + + expect(results[0].result.transactions).toEqual([tx, tx2]); + expect(results[1].result.transactions).toEqual([tx3, tx4]); + expect(results[2].result.transactions).toEqual([tx5]); +});Also applies to: 1598-1613
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
packages/transaction-manager/test/index.test.ts(8 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
packages/transaction-manager/test/index.test.ts (1)
30-46: LGTM! Test data declarations are well structured.
The new test transaction objects (tx3, tx4, tx5) are properly defined and follow the existing pattern, providing good test data for pagination scenarios.
| it('should return paginated results when page and pageSize are specified', async () => { | ||
| const fakeMetaDataAccessGetChannelsReturn: DataAccessTypes.IReturnGetChannelsByTopic = { | ||
| meta: { | ||
| transactionsStorageLocation: { | ||
| [channelId]: ['fakeDataId1', 'fakeDataId2'], | ||
| [channelId2]: ['fakeDataId12', 'fakeDataId22'], | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| result: { transactions: { [channelId]: [tx, tx2], [channelId2]: [tx, tx2] } }, | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| fakeDataAccess.getChannelsByTopic = jest | ||
| .fn() | ||
| .mockReturnValue(fakeMetaDataAccessGetChannelsReturn); | ||
| const transactionManager = new TransactionManager(fakeDataAccess); | ||
|
|
||
| // Test first page with 2 transactions | ||
| const page1 = await transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 1, 2); | ||
| expect(Object.keys(page1.result.transactions)).toHaveLength(2); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance pagination test coverage.
The current pagination test cases are minimal and don't thoroughly validate the pagination functionality. Consider adding:
- Test cases for different pages:
- Second page
- Last page with partial results
- Content validation:
- Verify transaction content, not just length
- Validate correct ordering
- Edge cases:
- Empty result set
- Last page
- Page beyond available data
- Error cases:
- Invalid page numbers (0, negative)
- Invalid page sizes (0, negative)
- Pagination metadata validation:
- Total items
- Total pages
- Current page
Example enhancement:
it('should return paginated results when page and pageSize are specified', async () => {
const transactionManager = new TransactionManager(fakeDataAccess);
- // Test first page with 2 transactions
- const page1 = await transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 1, 2);
- expect(Object.keys(page1.result.transactions)).toHaveLength(2);
+ // Test first page
+ const page1 = await transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 1, 1);
+ expect(Object.keys(page1.result.transactions)).toHaveLength(1);
+ expect(page1.result.transactions[channelId]).toEqual([tx]);
+ expect(page1.meta.pagination).toEqual({
+ currentPage: 1,
+ pageSize: 1,
+ totalItems: 2,
+ totalPages: 2
+ });
+
+ // Test second page
+ const page2 = await transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 2, 1);
+ expect(Object.keys(page2.result.transactions)).toHaveLength(1);
+ expect(page2.result.transactions[channelId2]).toEqual([tx2]);
+
+ // Test invalid page
+ await expect(
+ transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 0, 1)
+ ).rejects.toThrow('Invalid page number');
+
+ // Test invalid page size
+ await expect(
+ transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 1, 0)
+ ).rejects.toThrow('Invalid page size');
+
+ // Test page beyond available data
+ const emptyPage = await transactionManager.getChannelsByTopic(extraTopics[0], undefined, 3, 1);
+ expect(Object.keys(emptyPage.result.transactions)).toHaveLength(0);
});Similar enhancements should be applied to the getChannelsByMultipleTopics test case.
Also applies to: 1550-1578
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
packages/request-client.js/src/http-data-access.ts (1)
178-179: Add JSDoc documentation for pagination parameters.The method signatures correctly implement optional pagination parameters. However, the JSDoc comments should be updated to document these new parameters and their constraints.
Add parameter documentation:
/** * @param page Optional page number (1-based indexing) * @param pageSize Optional number of items per page */Also applies to: 217-218
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
packages/data-access/src/combined-data-access.ts(1 hunks)packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts(3 hunks)packages/request-client.js/src/http-data-access.ts(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- packages/data-access/src/combined-data-access.ts
- packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts
🔇 Additional comments (1)
packages/request-client.js/src/http-data-access.ts (1)
223-224: LGTM!
The pagination parameters are correctly forwarded to the underlying request.
| if (page !== undefined && page < 1) { | ||
| throw new Error(`Page number must be greater than or equal to 1 but it is ${page}`); | ||
| } | ||
| if (pageSize !== undefined && pageSize <= 0) { | ||
| throw new Error(`Page size must be positive but it is ${pageSize}`); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add parameter validation to getChannelsByMultipleTopics.
While the validation in getChannelsByTopic is correct, the same validation is missing in getChannelsByMultipleTopics. This could lead to inconsistent behavior.
Extract the validation into a shared helper method:
private validatePaginationParams(page?: number, pageSize?: number): void {
if (page !== undefined && page < 1) {
throw new Error(`Page number must be greater than or equal to 1 but it is ${page}`);
}
if (pageSize !== undefined && pageSize <= 0) {
throw new Error(`Page size must be positive but it is ${pageSize}`);
}
}| const params: { | ||
| topic: string; | ||
| updatedBetween?: DataAccessTypes.ITimestampBoundaries; | ||
| page?: number; | ||
| pageSize?: number; | ||
| } = { | ||
| topic, | ||
| updatedBetween, | ||
| }); | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| if (page !== undefined) { | ||
| params.page = page; | ||
| if (pageSize !== undefined) { | ||
| params.pageSize = pageSize; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return await this.fetchAndRetry('/getChannelsByTopic', params); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Simplify pagination parameter handling.
The current logic makes pageSize dependent on page being defined, which could lead to unexpected behavior. Consider simplifying the parameter handling.
- const params: {
- topic: string;
- updatedBetween?: DataAccessTypes.ITimestampBoundaries;
- page?: number;
- pageSize?: number;
- } = {
- topic,
- updatedBetween,
- };
-
- if (page !== undefined) {
- params.page = page;
- if (pageSize !== undefined) {
- params.pageSize = pageSize;
- }
- }
+ const params = {
+ topic,
+ updatedBetween,
+ ...(page !== undefined && { page }),
+ ...(pageSize !== undefined && { pageSize }),
+ };📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| const params: { | |
| topic: string; | |
| updatedBetween?: DataAccessTypes.ITimestampBoundaries; | |
| page?: number; | |
| pageSize?: number; | |
| } = { | |
| topic, | |
| updatedBetween, | |
| }); | |
| }; | |
| if (page !== undefined) { | |
| params.page = page; | |
| if (pageSize !== undefined) { | |
| params.pageSize = pageSize; | |
| } | |
| } | |
| return await this.fetchAndRetry('/getChannelsByTopic', params); | |
| const params = { | |
| topic, | |
| updatedBetween, | |
| ...(page !== undefined && { page }), | |
| ...(pageSize !== undefined && { pageSize }), | |
| }; | |
| return await this.fetchAndRetry('/getChannelsByTopic', params); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts (2)
90-103: Consider optimizing transaction processing for paginated requestsWhile the pagination metadata is correctly included, consider optimizing the transaction processing:
- const locations = channelIds.flatMap( - (channel) => this.#channelToLocationsIndex.get(channel) || [], - ); - const transactions = await this.parseDocuments(locations); + // Fetch only the transactions needed for the current page + const locations = channelIds.reduce((acc, channel) => { + const channelLocations = this.#channelToLocationsIndex.get(channel) || []; + return acc.concat(channelLocations); + }, [] as string[]); + + const transactions = await this.parseDocuments(locations);This change maintains the same functionality while potentially reducing memory usage during the flatMap operation.
58-103: Consider end-to-end pagination optimizationWhile the current implementation handles pagination of channel IDs effectively, consider that we're still fetching and processing all transactions for the selected channels. For truly scalable pagination, you might want to consider:
- Implementing pagination at the transaction level, not just the channel level
- Adding caching for frequently accessed pages
- Implementing cursor-based pagination for better performance with large datasets
Would you like to discuss these architectural improvements further?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
packages/data-access/src/in-memory-indexer.ts (1)
71-88: LGTM! Efficient implementation of pagination logic
The implementation efficiently handles unique channel IDs using Set and includes proper bounds checking with appropriate early return.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts (1)
88-109: Consider adding clarifying comments for the pagination adjustment logic.While the implementation is correct, the complex logic for handling pending items with pagination could benefit from additional documentation explaining:
- Why pending items take precedence
- How the page size adjustment maintains consistency
- The rationale behind the adjustment calculations
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
packages/data-access/src/data-read.ts (2)
52-55: LGTM: Method signature changes are consistent.
The pagination parameters are correctly added and properly forwarded to the underlying implementation.
64-70: LGTM: Robust pagination parameter validation.
The validation ensures:
- Page numbers start from 1
- Page size is positive
- Error messages are descriptive and include the invalid value
Fixes #1382
Add pagination all the way from the request-client to the request-node and subgraph queries.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation