[WEB-2769]fix: transfer cycles mutation issue #6200
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes introduce a new import for Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
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 (
|
![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
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
web/core/store/issue/cycle/issue.store.ts (1)
312-316: Consider adding error handling for sync operationThe sync operation should include error handling to gracefully handle potential failures.
if (this.paginationOptions) { - await persistence.syncIssues(projectId.toString()); + try { + await persistence.syncIssues(projectId.toString()); + } catch (error) { + console.error("Failed to sync issues:", error); + // Consider if we should still proceed with fetchIssues + } await this.fetchIssues(workspaceSlug, projectId, "mutation", this.paginationOptions, cycleId); }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
web/core/store/issue/cycle/issue.store.ts(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
web/core/store/issue/cycle/issue.store.ts (2)
23-24: LGTM: Import statement is properly placed
The new import for persistence is correctly placed in the local imports section.
312-316: Verify sync operation timing
The changes look good and align with fixing the mutation issue. Let's verify the usage of syncIssues across the codebase to ensure there are no potential race conditions.
✅ Verification successful
No race conditions found in sync operations
The codebase analysis shows that syncIssues is used consistently and safely across the application:
- In issue services, it's called after successful API operations (bulk operations, deletions, archives)
- In stores, it's called before fetching issues to ensure data consistency
- The sync operation is idempotent as seen in
storage.sqlite.ts - Error handling is properly implemented in the persistence layer
- The sync operation is properly coordinated with other workspace-related syncs
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check usage of syncIssues to understand the sync patterns
# and potential race conditions
# Search for all syncIssues calls
rg "syncIssues" -A 3 -B 3
# Search for persistence usage patterns
ast-grep --pattern 'await persistence.$_($$$)'
Length of output: 15541
Description
Fixed mutation issue when using transfer cycle in cycles
Type of Change
Screenshots and Media
Screen.Recording.2024-12-13.at.7.40.08.PM.mov
References
WEB-2769
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes