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

Backup not found returns 404 instead of 400 #5479

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 10, 2024
Merged

Backup not found returns 404 instead of 400 #5479

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 10, 2024

Conversation

mdegat01
Copy link
Contributor

@mdegat01 mdegat01 commented Dec 10, 2024

Proposed change

If a resource cannot be found, the API should return a 404 not a 400. Fixes this for backups.

Type of change

  • Dependency upgrade
  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (which adds functionality to the supervisor)
  • Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
  • Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

  • This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes #
  • This PR is related to issue:
  • Link to documentation pull request:
  • Link to cli pull request:
  • Link to client library pull request:

Checklist

  • The code change is tested and works locally.
  • Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
  • There is no commented out code in this PR.
  • I have followed the development checklist
  • The code has been formatted using Ruff (ruff format supervisor tests)
  • Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

If API endpoints or add-on configuration are added/changed:

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Introduced a new exception class, APINotFound, for more specific error handling when a backup is not found.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Enhanced error handling logic to provide clearer feedback for non-existent backups.
  • Tests

    • Added a new test function to verify API behavior when a backup is not found, ensuring correct status and response messages.

@mdegat01 mdegat01 added the bugfix A bug fix label Dec 10, 2024
@mdegat01 mdegat01 requested a review from agners December 10, 2024 20:24
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 10, 2024

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes introduced in this pull request involve the addition of a new exception class, APINotFound, to improve error handling for scenarios where a backup is not found. This class inherits from APIError and includes a status code of 404. The constructor of APIError has been updated to accept an optional job_id parameter. Additionally, a new test function has been added to validate the behavior of the API when a backup does not exist, ensuring that the appropriate error response is returned.

Changes

File Change Summary
supervisor/api/backups.py Added new exception class APINotFound, replacing APIError in _extract_slug method for not found cases. Updated import statement for APINotFound.
supervisor/exceptions.py Introduced APINotFound exception class inheriting from APIError with a status code of 404. Updated APIError constructor to include optional job_id.
tests/api/test_backups.py Added new test function test_backup_not_found to verify API behavior when a backup is not found, checking for a 404 status and appropriate response message.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Client
    participant API
    participant BackupService

    Client->>API: Request backup
    API->>BackupService: Check if backup exists
    alt Backup not found
        BackupService-->>API: Backup not found
        API-->>Client: 404 Not Found (APINotFound)
    else Backup found
        BackupService-->>API: Backup data
        API-->>Client: 200 OK (Backup data)
    end
Loading

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 045454b and e8c980d.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • supervisor/api/backups.py (2 hunks)
  • supervisor/exceptions.py (1 hunks)
  • tests/api/test_backups.py (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
supervisor/exceptions.py (6)

Pattern */**(html|markdown|md): - For instructional content in documentation, use a direct and authoritative tone. Avoid expressions of politeness such as 'may' or 'please', and ensure the goal of the instruction is fronted.

  • Apply the Microsoft Style Guide to ensure documentation maintains clarity and conciseness.
  • In step-by-step instructions, front the location phrase in the instructional sentence.
  • In step-by-step instructions, front the 'goal' in the instructional sentence.
  • In step-by-step instructions, if in doubt what to front, front the 'goal' before the location phrase in the instructional sentence.
  • do not hyphenate terms like 'top-right' or 'bottom-left' with 'corner'

Pattern */**(html|markdown|md): - Use bold to mark UI strings.

  • If "" are used to mark UI strings, replace them by bold.

Pattern */**(html|markdown|md): - Be brief in your replies and don't add fluff like "thank you for..." and "Please let me know if"


Pattern */**(html|markdown|md): - Use sentence-style capitalization also in headings.


Pattern */**(html|markdown|md): do not comment on HTML used for icons


Pattern */**(html|markdown|md): Avoid flagging inline HTML for embedding videos in future reviews for this repository.

🔇 Additional comments (4)
supervisor/exceptions.py (1)

339-342: LGTM! The new APINotFound exception is well-structured.

The exception class follows the established pattern and uses the correct HTTP status code for resource not found scenarios.

supervisor/api/backups.py (2)

49-49: LGTM! Import statement is correctly placed.

The APINotFound import is appropriately grouped with related exception imports.


137-137: LGTM! Appropriate use of APINotFound exception.

The error message "Backup does not exist" clearly indicates the nature of the error, and using APINotFound will correctly return a 404 status code.

tests/api/test_backups.py (1)

734-749: LGTM! Comprehensive test coverage for backup not found scenarios.

The test effectively covers all endpoints that should return 404 when a backup is not found, using parametrization to reduce code duplication.


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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Experiment)
  • @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 or @coderabbitai title anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

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.

@frenck frenck merged commit 774aef7 into main Dec 10, 2024
21 checks passed
@frenck frenck deleted the no-backup-404 branch December 10, 2024 21:30
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 13, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants