fix(orgusers): support case-insensitive name filtering#1723
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
📝 WalkthroughSummary by CodeRabbit
Walkthrough
ChangesNon-role Filter Operator Validation
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Coverage Report for CI Build 28582274495Warning Build has drifted: This PR's base is out of sync with its target branch, so coverage data may include unrelated changes. Coverage increased (+1.0%) to 44.847%Details
Uncovered Changes
Coverage Regressions443 previously-covered lines in 16 files lost coverage.
Coverage Stats
💛 - Coveralls |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 4f879278-05b7-407a-92d3-60dce59bd68d
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
internal/store/postgres/org_users_repository.gointernal/store/postgres/org_users_repository_test.go
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- internal/store/postgres/org_users_repository_test.go
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Caution
Inline review comments failed to post. This is likely due to GitHub's internal server error or limits when posting large numbers of comments. If you are seeing this consistently it is likely a permissions issue. Please check "Moderation" -> "Code review limits" under your organization settings.
Actionable comments posted: 1
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 4f879278-05b7-407a-92d3-60dce59bd68d
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
internal/store/postgres/org_users_repository.gointernal/store/postgres/org_users_repository_test.go
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- internal/store/postgres/org_users_repository_test.go
🛑 Comments failed to post (1)
internal/store/postgres/org_users_repository.go (1)
327-337: 🎯 Functional Correctness | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick win
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash rg -n -A6 'org_joined_at' internal/store/postgres/org_users_repository_test.goRepository: raystack/frontier
Length of output: 6564
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash set -euo pipefail echo '--- org_users_repository.go (relevant function) ---' sed -n '327,380p' internal/store/postgres/org_users_repository.go | cat -n echo echo '--- org_users_repository_test.go (org_joined_at-related tests) ---' sed -n '150,230p' internal/store/postgres/org_users_repository_test.go | cat -n echo echo '--- search for org_joined_at + ilike / empty / notempty / bad operator cases ---' rg -n -A4 -B4 'org_joined_at|ilike|empty|notempty|wrapBadOperatorError|GetDataTypeOfField' internal/store/postgres org_users_repository_test.goRepository: raystack/frontier
Length of output: 50374
Datatype routing is missing for
org_joined_at.buildNonRoleFilterConditionstill applies the same operator allowlist to every field, then mapsorg_joined_attopolicies.created_atwithout checking the field type. That letslike/ilike/in/emptythrough on a datetime column instead of rejecting them; add a rejection test fororg_joined_at+ilike/empty.Source: Learnings
|
@coderabbitai Addressed the datatype-routing finding.
Restored the |
|
Tip For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes. 🧩 Analysis chain🏁 Script executed: #!/bin/bash
cd /tmp && rm -rf frontier && git clone --depth 50 https://github.com/raystack/frontier.git frontier 2>&1 | tail -5
cd frontier && git fetch origin pull/1723/head:pr1723 2>&1 | tail -5 && git checkout pr1723 2>&1 | tail -5
sed -n '1,400p' internal/store/postgres/org_users_repository.go | grep -n "buildNonRoleFilterCondition" -A 80Length of output: 6890 Confirmed — the updated |
3 participants
Summary
Fixes "unable to filter by name" on the organization users list. The non-rolefilter builder did not support the
ilike/notilikeoperators, so a name filter sent asilikewas rejected withwrapBadOperatorErrorand the filter silently failed. This addsilike/notilikesupport and, while there, hardens operator handling by routing on the column's declared datatype so string-only operators can no longer be applied to the datetimeorg_joined_atcolumn.Changes
ilike/notilikeoperator support for string columns.rql.GetDataTypeOfField) instead of one combined operator list.org_joined_atcolumn toeq/neq/gt/lt/gte/lte; any other operator (includinglike/ilike/in/empty) now returnswrapBadOperatorError.ilike/notilike, a valid datetime operator (gte), andilikerejected on the datetime column.Technical Details
buildNonRoleFilterConditionlooks up the field's datatype up front:eq/neq/gt/lt/gte/lte.eq/neq/like/ilike/in/notin/notlike/notilike/empty/notempty.like/notlikewrap the value in%...%themselves;ilike/notilikeexpect the caller to include the wildcards (e.g.%foo%). The local operator lists mirrorsalt/rql's upstreamvalidString/DatetimeOperations, so the new branches are reachable from the API. Side effect: an unknown field name now fails fast viaGetDataTypeOfFieldinstead of falling through to the raw column name.Test Plan
SQL Safety (if your PR touches
*_repository.goorgoqu.*)?placeholders,goqu.Ex{}, orgoqu.Record{}— neverfmt.Sprintfor+building a query that gets executed.ToSQL()callers capture and forward params (query, params, err := stmt.ToSQL(); db.…Context(ctx, …, query, params...)). Neverquery, _, err := ….?placeholders inside single-quoted SQL literals ingoqu.L(usemake_interval(hours => ?)-style functions instead).//nolint:forbidigoor// #nosec G20xannotation has a one-line justification on the same line that a reviewer can verify.