[ISSUE #1452]🔥Refactor rocketmq-remoting crate error handle🚨 #1455
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes introduced in this pull request primarily focus on refactoring error handling across various components of the RocketMQ system. The Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
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
Documentation and Community
|
|
🔊@mxsm 🚀Thanks for your contribution 🎉. CodeRabbit(AI) will review your code first 🔥 |
rocketmq-rust-bot
added
AI review first
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1455 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 21.25% 22.01% +0.76%
==========================================
Files 443 448 +5
Lines 57212 57927 +715
==========================================
+ Hits 12161 12755 +594
- Misses 45051 45172 +121 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (26)
rocketmq-remoting/src/lib.rs (2)
40-40: Document the Result type change in the crate documentationThe Result type alias change is a breaking change that affects the entire crate's public API. While the change itself is good for type safety and domain specificity, it needs proper documentation.
Consider adding a doc comment above the Result type alias explaining its usage and the error type:
+/// A specialized Result type for RocketMQ remoting operations. +/// The error type defaults to [`RemotingError`] which provides specific error cases +/// for remoting operations. pub type Result<T, E = RemotingError> = std::result::Result<T, E>;
Line range hint
18-19: Consider stabilizing feature dependenciesThe crate uses unstable features (
sync_unsafe_cellandduration_constructors). While not directly related to the error handling changes, this could affect long-term maintenance.Consider:
- Documenting why these unstable features are necessary
- Investigating if stable alternatives exist
- Adding feature gates to make the unstable features optional
rocketmq-broker/src/error.rs (1)
23-23: Consider adding documentation for the new error type.While the error message is descriptive, it would be helpful to add documentation explaining the specific scenarios where
BrokerClientErrorwithRemotingErroroccurs and how to handle them.Add documentation like this:
+ /// Represents errors that occur during broker client operations. + /// These errors originate from the remoting layer and typically involve + /// network communication issues or protocol-related failures. #[error("broker client error: {0}")] BrokerClientError(#[from] rocketmq_remoting::remoting_error::RemotingError),rocketmq-client/src/error.rs (1)
Line range hint
22-45: Consider enhancing error context and documentation.While the error structure is solid, consider these enhancements:
- Add documentation comments for each error variant explaining when they occur
- Consider adding error codes as constants for better maintainability
- Consider adding helper methods for common error scenarios
Example enhancement:
#[derive(Debug, Error)] pub enum MQClientError { + /// Represents a general client error. + /// + /// # Arguments + /// * `code` - The error code (see ERROR_CODES.md) + /// * `message` - Detailed error description #[error("Client exception occurred: CODE:{0}, Message:{1}")] MQClientErr(i32, String),rocketmq-broker/src/lib.rs (1)
51-52: Consider adding documentation for the error type change.Since this is part of a larger error handling refactor, it would be helpful to document the rationale and any new error handling patterns introduced.
Add documentation above the type alias:
+/// RemotingError type from rocketmq-remoting crate. +/// This type represents specific errors that can occur during remoting operations. type RemotingError = rocketmq_remoting::remoting_error::RemotingError;rocketmq-remoting/src/code/broker_request_code.rs (2)
44-47: Consider following Rust error message conventionsWhile the error message is informative, consider following Rust's error message conventions:
- Lower case for error messages
- No punctuation at the end
- Concise wording
- _ => Err(FromStrErr(format!( - "Parse from string error,Invalid BrokerRequestCode: {}", - s - ))), + _ => Err(FromStrErr(format!( + "invalid broker request code `{}`", + s + ))),
Line range hint
51-85: Add test coverage for FromStr implementationWhile the file has good test coverage for
value_ofandget_type_from_name, it's missing tests for theFromStrimplementation that was modified. Consider adding tests for both successful and error cases.Here's a suggested test addition:
#[test] fn test_from_str() { // Test successful parsing assert_eq!( BrokerRequestCode::from_str("RegisterBroker").unwrap(), BrokerRequestCode::RegisterBroker ); // Test error case assert!(BrokerRequestCode::from_str("InvalidCode").is_err()); }rocketmq-remoting/src/rpc/rpc_response.rs (1)
29-29: Good: More specific error type improves error handling clarityThe change from
Option<Error>toOption<RemotingError>is a positive architectural improvement that:
- Makes error handling more specific and type-safe
- Clearly indicates the error domain (remoting-specific errors)
- Maintains the optional nature of the error field
Consider documenting the specific error scenarios that can lead to each RemotingError variant to help API consumers handle errors appropriately.
rocketmq-remoting/src/remoting_error.rs (4)
36-37: Fix formatting in RemotingTimeoutError messageThere's an extra space in the error message format:
< {0} >. This should be consistent with other error messages.- #[error("wait response on the channel < {0} >, timeout: {1}(ms)")] + #[error("wait response on the channel <{0}>, timeout: {1}ms")]
22-77: Consider enhancing error context and consistencyThe error variants are well-structured, but some improvements could make them more useful for debugging:
- Consider adding more context to
RemoteErrorandFromStrErras they're quite generic- Consider adding source address to
RemotingCommandDecoderErrorandRemotingCommandEncoderError- Consider using consistent casing in error messages (e.g., "RpcException" vs "RemotingCommandDecoderError")
Example enhancement for decoder error:
- #[error("RemotingCommandDecoderError:{0}")] + #[error("RemotingCommandDecoderError: Failed to decode command from {addr} - {message}")] RemotingCommandDecoderError(String),
79-219: Consider adding more comprehensive test coverageWhile the current tests are good, consider adding:
- Tests for
Fromtrait implementations (io::Error and Utf8Error)- Edge cases with empty strings
- Boundary value tests for numeric fields
Example additional tests:
#[test] fn test_from_io_error() { let io_error = io::Error::new(io::ErrorKind::NotFound, "file not found"); let error: RemotingError = io_error.into(); assert!(matches!(error, RemotingError::Io(_))); } #[test] fn test_empty_string_handling() { let error = RemotingError::RemoteError("".to_string()); assert_eq!(format!("{}", error), ""); } #[test] fn test_timeout_boundary() { let error = RemotingError::RemotingTimeoutError("localhost".to_string(), u64::MAX); assert!(format!("{}", error).contains(&u64::MAX.to_string())); }
1-219: Overall implementation is robust and well-testedThe error handling implementation aligns well with the PR objectives and follows Rust best practices. The use of
thiserrorand comprehensive test coverage demonstrates a good balance between functionality and maintainability.Consider documenting the error handling patterns in the project's documentation to ensure consistent usage across the codebase.
rocketmq-remoting/src/codec/remoting_command_codec.rs (1)
Line range hint
90-137: Remove commented codeThe old implementation should be removed rather than left commented out. If needed, this code can be retrieved from version control history.
rocketmq-remoting/src/net/channel.rs (2)
211-216: Consider enhancing error context and loggingThe error handling changes correctly use the new RemotingError type and maintain proper cleanup. However, consider these improvements:
- Add more descriptive error messages that include context like request ID or operation type
- Consider adding debug logging before returning errors to aid troubleshooting
Example enhancement:
- Err(RemotingError::ChannelRecvRequestFailed(e.to_string())) + let err_msg = format!("Failed to receive response for request {}: {}", opaque, e); + tracing::debug!("{}", err_msg); + Err(RemotingError::ChannelRecvRequestFailed(err_msg))
Line range hint
1-234: Consider timeout configuration improvementsWhile the error handling refactor is solid, consider these architectural improvements:
- Move timeout duration to configuration to allow environment-specific tuning
- Consider implementing retry logic with backoff for transient network failures
- Add metrics/monitoring for timeout and error occurrences
This would improve operational visibility and system resilience.
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/rocketmq_serializable.rs (1)
226-226: Consider adding test for protocol decode length validationThe error handling change to
RemotingError::DecodingErroris consistent with other changes. However, while there's test coverage forread_strlength validation, there doesn't appear to be equivalent test coverage for protocol decode length validation.Consider adding a test case similar to
read_str_exceeds_limitbut for protocol decoding:#[test] fn test_protocol_decode_exceeds_limit() { let mut buffer = BytesMut::new(); // Setup buffer with ext_fields_length > header_len let result = RocketMQSerializable::rocket_mq_protocol_decode(&mut buffer, 10); assert!(matches!(result, Err(RemotingError::DecodingError(_, _)))); }rocketmq-remoting/src/clients/client.rs (4)
Line range hint
90-108: Consider adding recovery strategy for non-IO errorsWhile IO errors are properly handled by marking the connection as invalid, other errors are only logged without any recovery mechanism. Consider implementing appropriate recovery strategies for different error types.
Err(error) => match error { Io(value) => { client.ctx.channel.connection.ok = false; error!("error: {:?}", value); return; } _ => { error!("error: {:?}", error); + // Consider implementing specific recovery strategies based on error type + // For example: + // match error { + // RemotingError::RemoteError(_) => attempt_reconnect(), + // _ => handle_unknown_error(), + // } } },
273-277: Enhance error messages for better debuggingThe current error messages directly use the error's string representation. Consider adding more context about the operation being performed.
- return Err(RemoteError(err.to_string())); + return Err(RemoteError(format!("Failed to send request through channel: {}", err)));- Err(error) => Err(RemoteError(error.to_string())), + Err(error) => Err(RemoteError(format!("Failed to receive response: {}", error))),
317-317: Maintain consistency in error message formattingFor consistency with the suggested changes in
send_read, consider enhancing the error message here as well.- return Err(RemoteError(err.to_string())); + return Err(RemoteError(format!("Failed to send request through channel: {}", err)));
Line range hint
1-349: Overall error handling architecture looks solidThe refactoring to use
RemotingErrorvariants improves type safety and error handling clarity throughout the client implementation. The error propagation is consistent, and the connection state is properly managed on errors. Consider documenting the error handling patterns in the codebase to maintain consistency across future implementations.rocketmq-remoting/src/clients/rocketmq_default_impl.rs (1)
Line range hint
336-356: Enhance error messages for better debuggingWhile the error handling refactor is good, the error messages could be more descriptive:
- None => Err(RemotingError::RemoteError("get client failed".to_string())), + None => Err(RemotingError::RemoteError(format!("Failed to get client for address: {:?}", addr))),The current implementation correctly standardizes error handling using RemotingError, which is a positive change. However, more context in error messages would help with debugging.
rocketmq-remoting/src/rpc/rpc_client_impl.rs (1)
110-118: Consider reducing error handling duplicationAll RPC handler methods follow the same error handling pattern with duplicated code. Consider extracting common error handling logic into helper functions:
- Response code handling
- Network error handling
Example helper function:
fn handle_rpc_error(error: impl std::error::Error, addr: &CheetahString) -> Result<RpcResponse> { Err(RpcError( From::from(ResponseCode::SystemError), format!("process failed. addr: {}. Error: {}", addr, error) )) }Also, consider enhancing error messages by including more context about the failed operation and the actual error details.
Also applies to: 147-155, 183-191, 219-227, 255-263, 295-303, 331-339, 363-371
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/remoting_command.rs (2)
Line range hint
477-481: Consider adding error context for better debugging.While the error handling is correct, consider including additional context about the total size and header length in the error message to aid in debugging.
- return Err(RemotingError::RemotingCommandDecoderError(format!( - "Header length {} is greater than total size {}", - header_length, total_size - ))); + return Err(RemotingError::RemotingCommandDecoderError(format!( + "Invalid header length detected: header_length={}, total_size={}, remaining_size={}", + header_length, total_size, total_size - 4 + )));
Line range hint
1-800: Consider adding error documentation.While the error handling changes look good, consider adding documentation for the new error cases to help users understand and handle these errors appropriately.
Add documentation above the RemotingCommand implementation:
/// Possible errors that can occur during remoting command operations: /// - RemotingCommandDecoderError: Occurs when there are issues decoding the command header /// - NotSupportSerializeType: Occurs when an unsupported serialization type is encountered impl RemotingCommand { // ... existing implementation ... }rocketmq-remoting/src/remoting_server/server.rs (2)
Line range hint
206-242: Refactor Error Handling to Eliminate Code DuplicationThe error handling logic within the
handle_errormethod has duplicated code when sending responses and handlingRemotingError. To improve maintainability and readability, consider refactoring the duplicated code into a helper function that handles sending responses and logging errors.Here's a suggested refactor:
async fn handle_error( &mut self, oneway_rpc: bool, opaque: i32, exception: Option<RemotingError>, ) -> HandleErrorResult { if let Some(exception_inner) = exception { match exception_inner { RemotingError::AbortProcessError(code, message) => { if oneway_rpc { return HandleErrorResult::Continue; } let response = RemotingCommand::create_response_command_with_code_remark(code, message); - tokio::select! { - result = self.connection_handler_context.channel.connection.writer.send(response.set_opaque(opaque)) => match result{ - Ok(_) =>{}, - Err(err) => { - match err { - RemotingError::Io(io_error) => { - error!("send response failed: {}", io_error); - return HandleErrorResult::ReturnMethod; - } - _ => { error!("send response failed: {}", err);} - } - }, - }, - } + return self.send_response(response.set_opaque(opaque)).await; } _ => { if !oneway_rpc { let response = RemotingCommand::create_response_command_with_code_remark( ResponseCode::SystemError, exception_inner.to_string(), ); - tokio::select! { - result = self.connection_handler_context.channel.connection.writer.send(response.set_opaque(opaque)) => match result{ - Ok(_) =>{}, - Err(err) => { - match err { - RemotingError::Io(io_error) => { - error!("send response failed: {}", io_error); - return HandleErrorResult::ReturnMethod; - } - _ => { error!("send response failed: {}", err);} - } - }, - }, - } + return self.send_response(response.set_opaque(opaque)).await; } } } HandleErrorResult::Continue } else { HandleErrorResult::GoHead } } +async fn send_response(&self, response: RemotingCommand) -> HandleErrorResult { + tokio::select! { + result = self.connection_handler_context.channel.connection.writer.send(response) => match result { + Ok(_) => {}, + Err(err) => { + match err { + RemotingError::Io(io_error) => { + error!("send response failed: {}", io_error); + return HandleErrorResult::ReturnMethod; + } + _ => { + error!("send response failed: {}", err); + } + } + }, + }, + } + HandleErrorResult::Continue +}
Line range hint
189-193: Refactor Error Handling inhandleMethod for ConsistencySimilar to the
handle_errormethod, the error handling logic when sending responses in thehandlemethod has duplicated patterns. Consider refactoring this logic to use the same helper function, ensuring consistency across methods.Apply the helper function
send_responseto streamline error handling:// Inside the `handle` method tokio::select! { result = self.connection_handler_context.channel.connection.writer.send(response.set_opaque(opaque)) => match result { - Ok(_) => {}, - Err(err) => { - match err { - RemotingError::Io(io_error) => { - error!("connection disconnect: {}", io_error); - return Ok(()) - } - _ => { error!("send response failed: {}", err); } - } - }, + _ => { + self.handle_send_error(result).await?; + } }, } +async fn handle_send_error(&self, result: Result<(), RemotingError>) -> Result<()> { + match result { + Ok(_) => Ok(()), + Err(err) => { + match err { + RemotingError::Io(io_error) => { + error!("connection disconnect: {}", io_error); + return Ok(()); + } + _ => { + error!("send response failed: {}", err); + } + } + Ok(()) + } + } +}
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (16)
rocketmq-broker/src/error.rs(1 hunks)rocketmq-broker/src/lib.rs(1 hunks)rocketmq-client/src/error.rs(1 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/clients/client.rs(3 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/clients/rocketmq_default_impl.rs(4 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/code/broker_request_code.rs(2 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/codec/remoting_command_codec.rs(3 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/error.rs(0 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/lib.rs(2 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/net/channel.rs(2 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/remoting_command.rs(4 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/rocketmq_serializable.rs(3 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/remoting_error.rs(1 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/remoting_server/server.rs(5 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/rpc/rpc_client_impl.rs(11 hunks)rocketmq-remoting/src/rpc/rpc_response.rs(2 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- rocketmq-remoting/src/error.rs
🔇 Additional comments (25)
rocketmq-remoting/src/lib.rs (2)
31-31: Verify usage patterns of RemotingError
The import statement suggests a centralized error type, which is good for consistency.
Let's check the usage patterns:
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can now generate the final response:
RemotingError is well-integrated and consistently used across the codebase
The error type is properly implemented and used throughout the codebase:
- Centrally defined in
rocketmq-remoting/src/remoting_error.rswith comprehensive variants - Consistently used across multiple modules for error handling
- Properly integrated into the error handling chain with other crates (e.g.,
rocketmq-client,rocketmq-broker) - Has proper error conversion implementations and well-documented error cases
- Used appropriately in network operations, RPC calls, and protocol handling
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Analyze RemotingError usage patterns
# Find all uses of RemotingError in the codebase
rg "RemotingError" --type rust -A 2 -B 2
# Check error conversion implementations
ast-grep --pattern 'impl From<$_> for RemotingError {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 28596
28-28: LGTM: New module declaration aligns with error handling refactoring
The addition of remoting_error module indicates a more domain-specific approach to error handling, which should improve error clarity and handling specificity.
Let's verify the completeness of the error handling migration:
✅ Verification successful
Error handling refactoring is properly implemented
The verification shows that:
- The new
remoting_errormodule is properly implemented with comprehensive error variants and tests - The module is correctly imported and used across the remoting crate and its dependents
- References to the old error module have been properly replaced with the new
RemotingError - The changes maintain proper error handling with specific error types for different scenarios
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that old error module is completely replaced
# Check for any remaining references to the old error module
rg -l "use.*error::" --type rust
# Check the structure of the new error module
ast-grep --pattern 'enum RemotingError {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 2458
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual usage of the new remoting_error module
rg "use.*remoting_error::" --type rust -A 2
# And check for any direct references to the old error module
rg "use.*error::Error" --type rust -A 2
# Also check the content of the remoting_error module
cat rocketmq-remoting/src/remoting_error.rs
Length of output: 13554
rocketmq-broker/src/error.rs (1)
23-23: LGTM! Verify error handling compatibility.
The change from error::Error to remoting_error::RemotingError is a good improvement towards more specific error types. This aligns well with the refactoring objectives.
Let's verify the error type compatibility and usage:
✅ Verification successful
LGTM! The error type change is compatible and well-structured.
The verification confirms that the change from error::Error to remoting_error::RemotingError is safe and properly integrated:
- The
RemotingErrortype is well-defined with comprehensive error variants and proper error handling patterns - The error type is consistently used across the codebase with proper error conversion using
#[from]derive - Other crates (client, broker) correctly handle and propagate the error through their error types
- No direct usage of the old
error::Errortype was found in the codebase
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check the RemotingError type definition and its usage
# to ensure all error cases are properly handled
# Check RemotingError definition
rg -A 10 "RemotingError" --type rust
# Check for any direct usage of the old error type
rg -l "rocketmq_remoting::error::Error" --type rust
# Look for potential error handling patterns
ast-grep --pattern 'match $expr {
$$$
Err(BrokerError::BrokerClientError($_)) => $$$
$$$
}'
Length of output: 51977
rocketmq-client/src/error.rs (2)
17-17: LGTM! Import path updated to use the new error module structure.
The change from error::Error to remoting_error::RemotingError aligns with the error handling refactoring objectives.
Let's verify the consistency of this change across the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
All imports consistently use the new remoting_error::RemotingError path
The verification confirms that:
- No instances of the old
rocketmq_remoting::error::Errorpath exist - The new
remoting_error::RemotingErrorpath is consistently used across the codebase in:rocketmq-client/src/error.rsrocketmq-broker/src/lib.rsrocketmq-broker/src/error.rs
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that all imports of RemotingError use the new path
# and there are no remaining references to the old path
# Check for any remaining old imports
rg "rocketmq_remoting::error::Error"
# Check for consistent usage of new imports
rg "rocketmq_remoting::remoting_error::RemotingError"
# Look for any potential error-related imports that might need updating
ast-grep --pattern 'use rocketmq_remoting::$_::Error'
Length of output: 437
Line range hint 22-45: Verify error code consistency with RemotingError.
The error enum structure looks good with comprehensive error variants. However, since we're refactoring error handling, we should ensure that the error codes in MQClientError variants (like MQClientErr, MQBrokerError) align with the new RemotingError codes.
Let's verify the error code consistency:
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different approach to verify the error code consistency.
Let me check one more thing to understand how RemotingError is mapped to MQClientError.
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:
Error code handling is properly implemented and consistent
The verification shows that:
RemotingErroris correctly integrated intoMQClientErrorthrough the#[from]derive attribute, ensuring proper error conversion- Error codes from
ResponseCodeenum are consistently used throughout the client implementation - The error variants in
MQClientErrorappropriately handle both remoting-level errors and client-specific errors with their respective error codes
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for error code definitions and usage patterns
# Look for error code definitions in both client and remoting crates
rg -A 5 "const.*_ERROR.*=.*\d+"
# Find all places where error codes are used
ast-grep --pattern 'MQClientError::$_($number, $_)'
Length of output: 620
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for error code definitions in remoting error
rg -A 3 "pub.*enum.*RemotingError"
rg "impl.*RemotingError"
# Search for error code constants or definitions in client
rg -A 5 "pub.*const.*ERROR" rocketmq-client/
rg "ResponseCode" rocketmq-client/
# Look for error code mappings or conversions
rg "From.*RemotingError.*MQClientError" rocketmq-client/
rg "into.*MQClientError" rocketmq-client/
Length of output: 6898
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the RemotingError definition and its response codes
rg -A 10 "pub enum RemotingError" rocketmq-remoting/
rg -A 10 "pub enum ResponseCode" rocketmq-remoting/
# Check how RemotingError is converted to MQClientError
cat rocketmq-client/src/error.rs
Length of output: 3160
rocketmq-broker/src/lib.rs (1)
51-51: LGTM! Verify usage of the new RemotingError type.
The change from error::Error to remoting_error::RemotingError aligns with Rust's best practices by using a more specific error type.
Let's verify the impact of this change:
✅ Verification successful
The type alias change is safe and consistent with the codebase
The verification shows that:
- The new
RemotingErrortype is properly defined inrocketmq-remoting/src/remoting_error.rs - All usages across the codebase are consistent with the new type
- No references to the old error path (
rocketmq_remoting::error::Error) remain - The error type is properly integrated into the error handling hierarchy of dependent crates (broker, client, tools)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check usage of RemotingError in the codebase to ensure consistent error handling
# Find all usages of RemotingError
echo "Checking RemotingError usage patterns:"
rg -A 2 "RemotingError"
# Check for any remaining uses of the old error path
echo "Checking for any remaining old error path usage:"
rg "rocketmq_remoting::error::Error"
Length of output: 18385
rocketmq-remoting/src/code/broker_request_code.rs (1)
3-4: LGTM! Clear and specific imports
The imports are well-structured, importing both the error type and the specific variant needed. This improves code readability and follows Rust best practices.
rocketmq-remoting/src/rpc/rpc_response.rs (2)
22-22: LGTM: Import of RemotingError is correctly scoped
The import statement properly uses the crate-level path, which is the correct approach for internal modules.
Line range hint 63-71: Verify error code handling and add documentation
While the implementation looks correct, there are a few points to consider:
- The default error code of 0 for non-RpcError variants needs verification
- The method lacks documentation explaining the error code mapping logic
Let's verify the error code handling conventions:
Consider adding documentation:
+ /// Creates a new RpcResponse for exception cases
+ /// # Arguments
+ /// * `exception` - Optional RemotingError that determines the response code:
+ /// - For RpcError variant: uses the embedded error code
+ /// - For other variants: uses code 0
pub fn new_exception(exception: Option<RemotingError>) -> Self {✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about error code handling by checking the error code definitions and their usage patterns.
Let me check one more aspect to understand the error code conventions better.
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:
Error code handling in new_exception is consistent with codebase patterns
The current implementation correctly handles error codes:
- Using 0 as the default error code for non-RpcError variants is consistent with the codebase's error handling patterns
- The method properly extracts specific error codes from RpcError variants while maintaining a clean fallback
- The implementation aligns with the success/error code conventions seen in other parts of the codebase
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other error code usages to verify consistency
rg -A 2 "RemotingError::RpcError"
# Look for any error code constants or documentation
rg -A 5 "pub const.*ERROR|error.*code"
Length of output: 6560
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check error code definitions in client_error_code.rs
ast-grep --pattern 'pub const.*ERROR'
# Check for error code handling patterns in RpcResponse
ast-grep --pattern 'impl RpcResponse {
$$$
}'
# Look for any error code documentation
rg -A 2 "error.*code" rocketmq-client/src/common/client_error_code.rs
Length of output: 4788
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for success/error code patterns in the codebase
rg -A 3 "pub.*fn.*new.*success|SUCCESS_CODE|ERROR_CODE"
# Look for error code constants
rg -A 2 "pub const.*SUCCESS|pub const.*ERROR"
# Check RemotingError usage patterns
ast-grep --pattern 'match $_ {
RemotingError::$$$
}'
Length of output: 1358
rocketmq-remoting/src/remoting_error.rs (1)
1-20: LGTM! Clean and minimal imports.
The license header is compliant, and the imports are appropriately minimal for the error handling implementation.
rocketmq-remoting/src/codec/remoting_command_codec.rs (4)
24-24: LGTM: Import change aligns with error handling refactor
The addition of RemotingError import is consistent with the PR's objective to refactor error handling.
62-62: LGTM: Error type update in Decoder implementation
The change to use RemotingError as the error type is appropriate and maintains the Decoder trait contract.
139-139: LGTM: Error type update in Encoder implementation
The change to use RemotingError as the error type is appropriate and maintains the Encoder trait contract. The existing test coverage adequately validates the implementation.
Line range hint 89-89: Verify edge cases in RemotingCommand::decode
The implementation has been simplified to delegate to RemotingCommand::decode. Please ensure that this method handles all edge cases covered by the previous implementation, including:
- Insufficient data handling (< 4 bytes)
- Total size validation
- Header length validation
- Deserialization error handling
Let's verify the implementation of RemotingCommand::decode:
✅ Verification successful
These commands will help us:
- Find decode function implementations
- Locate RemotingCommand implementations
- Identify error handling patterns around decode functions
Based on the search results, I can now verify the edge case handling in RemotingCommand::decode. The implementation in rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/remoting_command.rs shows that it properly handles all the edge cases mentioned in the review comment:
- Insufficient data handling (< 4 bytes):
if read_to < 4 {
// Wait for more data when there are less than 4 bytes.
return Ok(None);
}- Total size validation:
if read_to < total_size + 4 {
// Wait for more data when the available data is less than the total size.
return Ok(None);
}- Header length validation:
let header_length = parse_header_length(ori_header_length);
if header_length > total_size - 4 {
return Err(RemotingError::RemotingCommandDecoderError(format!(
"Header length {} is greater than total size {}",
header_length, total_size
)));
}- Deserialization error handling:
The code properly propagates errors through the Result type and has specific error handling for header length validation.
The new implementation maintains all the necessary edge case handling from the previous version
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for RemotingCommand::decode implementation
ast-grep --pattern 'impl RemotingCommand {
$$$
fn decode($$$) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
Length of output: 90
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search for decode implementation
rg -U "fn decode.*\{[\s\S]*?\}" --type rust -A 20
Length of output: 71078
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for RemotingCommand struct and its implementations
rg "impl.*RemotingCommand" --type rust -A 5
Length of output: 5803
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for error handling patterns in decode implementations
rg "Error|unwrap|expect|bail|ensure" --type rust -C 3 | rg -C 3 "decode"
Length of output: 74342
rocketmq-remoting/src/net/channel.rs (1)
36-38: LGTM: Clean error type imports
The new RemotingError imports are well-organized and properly scoped, aligning with the error handling refactoring objective.
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/rocketmq_serializable.rs (1)
29-29: LGTM: Import change aligns with error handling refactor
The change from Error to RemotingError import is consistent with the PR's objective of refactoring error handling in the remoting crate.
rocketmq-remoting/src/clients/client.rs (1)
33-35: LGTM: Clear and specific error imports
The explicit imports of specific error variants from RemotingError improve code clarity and type safety.
rocketmq-remoting/src/clients/rocketmq_default_impl.rs (2)
40-40: LGTM: Import change aligns with error handling refactor
The addition of RemotingError import is consistent with the PR's objective to refactor error handling.
Line range hint 336-385: Verify consistent error handling across the codebase
Let's verify that similar error handling patterns are applied consistently across the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can see a consistent pattern of error handling across the codebase. The error handling in the reviewed code follows the established patterns:
- Using strongly-typed errors with descriptive variants
- Converting errors between different error types with context
- Consistent error message formatting
- Proper error propagation using the
?operator
Error handling is consistent with the rest of the codebase
The reviewed code's error handling aligns with the project's patterns:
- Uses
RemotingErrorvariants appropriately - Converts errors with context (e.g.,
err.to_string()) - Follows the same error propagation style
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for remaining instances of direct Error usage that might need refactoring
rg "Error::" --type rust
# Search for other error handling patterns that might need standardization
ast-grep --pattern 'Err($_)'
Length of output: 100390
rocketmq-remoting/src/rpc/rpc_client_impl.rs (3)
36-36: LGTM: Consistent error handling pattern
The error handling has been improved by using a more specific RpcError type with a consistent pattern of including both a response code and descriptive message.
Also applies to: 74-77
434-437: LGTM: Clear error handling for unsupported requests
The error handling for unsupported request codes is well implemented with a clear error message that includes the specific request code for debugging.
Line range hint 1-456: Verify consistent error handling pattern
Let's verify that all RpcError usages follow the same pattern throughout the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
Error handling pattern is consistent across the codebase
The verification shows that RpcError follows a consistent pattern throughout the codebase:
- All RpcError constructions use the same (i32, String) signature
- Error handling in RpcClientImpl consistently uses RpcError for both direct errors and wrapped responses
- The only RpcException references are in error.rs for error formatting, which is the correct usage
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for consistent RpcError usage pattern
# Check RpcError construction pattern
rg -A 1 "RpcError\("
# Check if there are any remaining RpcException usages that should have been converted
rg "RpcException"
Length of output: 4151
rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/remoting_command.rs (3)
46-46: LGTM: Import of RemotingError aligns with error handling refactor.
The addition of the RemotingError import is consistent with the PR's objective to refactor error handling in the remoting crate.
507-510: LGTM: Improved error handling in header_decode.
The error handling has been improved by using a specific RemotingError variant with a descriptive message.
737-737: LGTM: Appropriate error handling for unsupported serialization types.
The error handling for unsupported serialization types is clear and specific.
| @@ -34,14 +34,14 @@ | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| impl FromStr for BrokerRequestCode { | |||
| type Err = Error; | |||
| type Err = RemotingError; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Inconsistent error types found in FromStr implementations
The verification reveals inconsistent error type usage across FromStr implementations:
BrokerRequestCode: UsesRemotingErrorCQType: Usesanyhow::ErrorCleanupPolicy: UsesParseCleanupPolicyError
These inconsistencies should be aligned with the error handling refactoring:
rocketmq-common/src/common/attribute/cq_type.rs: Consider changing fromanyhow::Errorto a domain-specific error typerocketmq-common/src/common/attribute/cleanup_policy.rs: Already using a domain-specific error type, which is good
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify consistent error type usage across FromStr implementations
The change to RemotingError aligns with the refactoring objectives. However, we should ensure this pattern is consistently applied across all FromStr implementations in the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining FromStr implementations that might still use the old Error type
ast-grep --pattern 'impl FromStr for $_ {
type Err = Error;
$$$
}'
# Search for all FromStr implementations to verify consistency
ast-grep --pattern 'impl FromStr for $_ {
type Err = $_;
$$$
}'
Length of output: 3497
| @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| if len > limit { | |||
| return Err(Error::DecodingError(len, limit)); | |||
| return Err(RemotingError::DecodingError(len, limit)); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Test coverage needs improvement for DecodingError variant
The test read_str_exceeds_limit only verifies that an error occurs but doesn't specifically assert the error type and values. The test should be enhanced to verify:
- The error is specifically a
RemotingError::DecodingError - The error contains correct length (4) and limit (2) values
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify error handling coverage in tests
The change to RemotingError::DecodingError maintains the same error semantics while providing better context with both actual and limit lengths.
Let's verify the test coverage for this error case:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the DecodingError test case exists
rg -A 5 "read_str_exceeds_limit|DecodingError" rocketmq-remoting/src/protocol/rocketmq_serializable.rs
Length of output: 863
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the test implementation more thoroughly to verify error type
ast-grep --pattern 'fn read_str_exceeds_limit() {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 580
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the RemotingError definition to understand expected error types
rg -A 5 "pub enum RemotingError" rocketmq-remoting/src
Length of output: 421
| Err(err) => Err(RemotingError::RemoteError(err.to_string())), | ||
| } | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Critical: Error handling in spawned task needs attention
The error handling has been updated to use RemotingError, but the error from the spawned task is not being propagated or logged. This could lead to silent failures.
Consider either:
- Logging the error:
.await
{
Ok(_) => Ok(()),
- Err(err) => Err(RemotingError::RemoteError(err.to_string())),
+ Err(err) => {
+ error!("Oneway invocation failed: {}", err);
+ Err(RemotingError::RemoteError(err.to_string()))
+ }
}- Or returning a Result from invoke_oneway:
- async fn invoke_oneway(
+ async fn invoke_oneway(
&self,
addr: &CheetahString,
request: RemotingCommand,
timeout_millis: u64,
- ) {
+ ) -> Result<()> {Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| use crate::net::channel::Channel; | ||
| use crate::protocol::remoting_command::RemotingCommand; | ||
| use crate::protocol::RemotingCommandType; | ||
| use crate::remoting_error::RemotingError; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Update Unit Tests to Cover New Error Handling Logic
With the introduction of RemotingError, it's important to update or add unit tests that cover all variants of the new error type. This ensures that the error handling logic is correctly implemented and helps prevent regressions.
Would you like assistance in generating unit tests for the new error handling scenarios?
rocketmq-rust-bot
added
approved
Which Issue(s) This PR Fixes(Closes)
Fixes #1452
Brief Description
How Did You Test This Change?
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
RemotingErrortype, enhancing clarity in error reporting.Bug Fixes
RemotingErrorfor better error categorization.Documentation
RemotingErrorenum, validating the error message formatting for various error types.Chores
Errortype and related modules, streamlining the error handling structure across the codebase.