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

feat: improved custom components handling #350

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 3, 2025

Conversation

aaronsteers
Copy link
Contributor

@aaronsteers aaronsteers commented Feb 19, 2025

Resolves: #250

Improves handling and logging when working with SDM custom components in test reads.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes
    • Updated error messages for improved clarity, ensuring users are informed when required inputs are missing.
    • Enhanced validation logic to prevent unnecessary processing when code is not provided.
    • Detailed error information is now offered when mismatches occur, aiding in effective issue resolution.
    • These updates aim to deliver a more streamlined and robust user experience.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 19, 2025
@aaronsteers aaronsteers requested a review from bnchrch February 28, 2025 23:27
@aaronsteers aaronsteers marked this pull request as ready for review February 28, 2025 23:27
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 28, 2025

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@aaronsteers has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 23 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 @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

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.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ebd4137 and 1a34aac.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • airbyte_cdk/sources/declarative/parsers/custom_code_compiler.py (4 hunks)
📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This change improves the error handling and validation logic in the custom code compiler. The error message for empty input text in the _hash_text function has been updated, and the validation logic in the validate_python_code function now returns early if no code is provided. Additionally, checksum mismatches now raise an AirbyteCodeTamperedError with a detailed message. The check for a required manifest in get_registered_components_module has also been tightened to ensure the necessary configuration is present before proceeding.

Changes

File Change Summary
airbyte_cdk/sources/declarative/parsers/custom_code_compiler.py • Updated error message in _hash_text: now raises "Hash input text cannot be empty."
• Added early return in validate_python_code for empty code text.
• Enhanced checksum validation to raise AirbyteCodeTamperedError with detailed information.
• Modified manifest check in get_registered_components_module to raise a RuntimeError if INJECTED_MANIFEST is missing.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Caller
    participant Compiler

    Caller->>Compiler: Call _hash_text(text)
    alt Text is empty
        Compiler-->>Caller: Raise "Hash input text cannot be empty."
    else Text is valid
        Compiler-->>Caller: Return computed hash
    end

    Caller->>Compiler: Call validate_python_code(code_text)
    alt code_text is empty
        Compiler-->>Caller: Return early (nothing to validate)
    else
        Compiler->>Compiler: Compute expected checksum
        Compiler->>Compiler: Compute actual checksum
        alt Checksums mismatch
            Compiler-->>Caller: Raise AirbyteCodeTamperedError with details
        else Checksums match
            Compiler-->>Caller: Return success
        end
    end

    Caller->>Compiler: Call get_registered_components_module(config)
    alt INJECTED_MANIFEST missing in config
        Compiler-->>Caller: Raise RuntimeError
    else
        Compiler-->>Caller: Return registered components module
    end
Loading

Suggested reviewers

  • Should we invite maxi297 as a reviewer, wdyt?
  • How about including alafanechere for their insights, wdyt?
  • Would it be good to have ChristoGrab review these changes, wdyt?

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:

‼️ IMPORTANT
Auto-reply has been disabled for this repository in the CodeRabbit settings. The CodeRabbit bot will not respond to your replies unless it is explicitly tagged.

  • 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.
  • @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.

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.

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: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
airbyte_cdk/sources/declarative/parsers/custom_code_compiler.py (1)

114-114: Consider consolidating condition checks.

Since we now verify that config and INJECTED_MANIFEST exist before this line, should we simplify this condition? Perhaps something like:

-    if config and config.get(INJECTED_COMPONENTS_PY, None):
+    if config.get(INJECTED_COMPONENTS_PY, None):

wdyt? This would make the code a bit cleaner since we've already established that config exists.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 533b70a and ebd4137.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • airbyte_cdk/sources/declarative/parsers/custom_code_compiler.py (4 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Actions: Linters
airbyte_cdk/sources/declarative/parsers/custom_code_compiler.py

[error] 111-111: Unsupported right operand type for in ('Mapping[str, Any] | None')

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (6)
  • GitHub Check: Check: 'source-pokeapi' (skip=false)
  • GitHub Check: Check: 'source-amplitude' (skip=false)
  • GitHub Check: Check: 'source-shopify' (skip=false)
  • GitHub Check: Check: 'source-hardcoded-records' (skip=false)
  • GitHub Check: Pytest (All, Python 3.11, Ubuntu)
  • GitHub Check: Pytest (All, Python 3.10, Ubuntu)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
airbyte_cdk/sources/declarative/parsers/custom_code_compiler.py (3)

48-48: More descriptive error message looks good.

The error message is now more specific about what input is empty, which helps with debugging. This is a nice improvement!


71-74: Early validation check for empty code text looks good.

Adding this early return is a nice optimization that avoids unnecessary validation when there's no code to validate. Good defensive programming practice!


84-95: Enhanced error reporting for checksum mismatch.

This change provides much more detailed information when a checksum doesn't match, including the expected and actual checksums, and the code text itself. This will make debugging much easier when tampering is detected.

@aaronsteers aaronsteers merged commit 40e5002 into main Mar 3, 2025
23 checks passed
@aaronsteers aaronsteers deleted the aj/feat/improved-custom-components-handling branch March 3, 2025 15:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Builder: Update test-read call in Builder to pass __injected_components_py to SDM/CDK
2 participants