Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

[ISSUE #2190]💫Add MappedFileRefactor trait🍻 #2191

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 10, 2025

Conversation

mxsm
Copy link
Owner

@mxsm mxsm commented Jan 10, 2025

Which Issue(s) This PR Fixes(Closes)

Fixes #2190

Brief Description

How Did You Test This Change?

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor
    • Introduced a new MappedFileRefactor trait with significant improvements to method signatures
    • Updated type safety and usability of mapped file operations
    • Added new methods for file initialization and iteration
    • Modified return types and parameter handling for various file-related methods

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 10, 2025

Walkthrough

This pull request introduces a new trait MappedFileRefactor in the rocketmq-store module, which represents a comprehensive refactoring of the existing MappedFile trait. The changes involve modifying method signatures, updating return types, and introducing new methods to improve type safety and functionality. The refactoring focuses on enhancing the interface for handling memory-mapped files, with modifications to methods like get_file_size, rename_to, append_message, and adding new methods such as append_message_with_callback and iterator.

Changes

File Change Summary
rocketmq-store/src/log_file/mapped_file.rs - Added new trait MappedFileRefactor
- Updated method signatures with type changes (u64 → usize, i64 → u64)
- Modified parameter types for methods like rename_to and append_message
- Introduced new methods: append_message_with_callback, init, iterator

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Refactor MappedFile trait
Ensure no new bugs
Update unit tests No explicit test updates visible in the diff
Performance impact Requires performance testing to confirm
Document architecture changes No documentation provided in the PR

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

feature, auto merge, ready to review, waiting-review, AI review first, rocketmq-store crate

Suggested reviewers

  • TeslaRustor
  • SpaceXCN
  • rocketmq-rust-bot

Poem

🐰 In the realm of mapped files so bright,
A refactor dances with delight!
Types transformed, methods anew,
Rust's performance shining through,
MappedFileRefactor takes its flight! 🚀


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. (Beta)
  • @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.

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.

@rocketmq-rust-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

🔊@mxsm 🚀Thanks for your contribution🎉!

💡CodeRabbit(AI) will review your code first🔥!

Note

🚨The code review suggestions from CodeRabbit are to be used as a reference only, and the PR submitter can decide whether to make changes based on their own judgment. Ultimately, the project management personnel will conduct the final code review💥.

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: 3

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between fb16dc9 and 172fc52.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • rocketmq-store/src/log_file/mapped_file.rs (2 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (9)
  • GitHub Check: build (windows-latest, nightly)
  • GitHub Check: build (windows-latest, stable)
  • GitHub Check: build (macos-latest, nightly)
  • GitHub Check: build (macos-latest, stable)
  • GitHub Check: test
  • GitHub Check: build (ubuntu-latest, nightly)
  • GitHub Check: build
  • GitHub Check: build (ubuntu-latest, stable)
  • GitHub Check: auto-approve
🔇 Additional comments (3)
rocketmq-store/src/log_file/mapped_file.rs (3)

610-615: Verify if append_message requires mutable access and consider passing message_callback by reference

The append_message method now takes &MessageExtBrokerInner instead of &mut MessageExtBrokerInner. If the implementation modifies message, it should accept a mutable reference.

Additionally, message_callback is now passed by value instead of by reference. If AMC is a large type or not Copy, passing it by reference &AMC might be more efficient.


617-622: Verify if append_messages requires mutable parameters and consider passing message_callback by reference

The append_messages method now takes immutable references to message and put_message_context, whereas previously they were mutable references. If these objects are modified within the method, they should be mutable references &mut.

Similarly, message_callback is now passed by value. Passing it by reference &AMC may improve efficiency if AMC is not trivial to copy.


658-658: Acknowledge the correction of the method name to clean_swapped_map

The method name has been corrected from clean_swaped_map to clean_swapped_map, fixing a typographical error. This improves code readability and consistency.


pub trait MappedFileRefactor {
fn get_file_name(&self) -> &CheetahString;
fn rename_to(&self, file_name: &CheetahString) -> bool;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Consider changing the receiver to &mut self for rename_to method

The rename_to method likely modifies the state of the object by renaming the file. Therefore, it should take &mut self instead of &self to reflect that it mutates the object.

pub trait MappedFileRefactor {
fn get_file_name(&self) -> &CheetahString;
fn rename_to(&self, file_name: &CheetahString) -> bool;
fn get_file_size(&self) -> usize;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Reconsider changing get_file_size return type to usize

Using usize for file sizes may lead to portability issues on 32-bit systems, where usize is 32 bits. If file sizes can exceed 4GB, it's safer to use u64 to prevent potential overflows and ensure consistency across different platforms.

Comment on lines +665 to +670
fn init(
&self,
file_name: &str,
file_size: usize,
transient_store_pool: &TransientStorePool,
) -> io::Result<()>;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Review the use of &self in the init method

The init method is expected to initialize the object's state, which typically requires mutable access. Consider changing the receiver to &mut self. Alternatively, if initialization happens during creation, making init an associated function without a receiver might be more appropriate.

Copy link
Collaborator

@rocketmq-rust-bot rocketmq-rust-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@rocketmq-rust-bot rocketmq-rust-bot merged commit b8decb3 into main Jan 10, 2025
25 checks passed
@rocketmq-rust-bot rocketmq-rust-bot added approved PR has approved and removed ready to review waiting-review waiting review this PR labels Jan 10, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 10, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 28.75%. Comparing base (fb16dc9) to head (172fc52).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2191   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   28.75%   28.75%           
=======================================
  Files         498      498           
  Lines       71059    71059           
=======================================
  Hits        20430    20430           
  Misses      50629    50629           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Refactor♻️]Add MappedFileRefactor for trait
3 participants