fix: update necessary if shadow cleared #196
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Test? |
jcosentino11
force-pushed
the
clear-edge-case
branch
from
67ad0c3
to
64ee734
Compare
jcosentino11
force-pushed
the
clear-edge-case
branch
from
64ee734
to
f21c308
Compare
MikeDombo
reviewed
Oct 10, 2023
| @@ -242,9 +242,7 @@ public UpdateThingShadowHandlerResponse handleRequest(UpdateThingShadowRequest r | |||
| .withVersion(updatedDocument.getVersion()) | |||
| .withClientToken(clientToken) | |||
| .withTimestamp(Instant.now()) | |||
| // explicitly convert to shadow document to return valid state. | |||
| // this is to prevent edge cases like returning null | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this seems to think that returning null is bad... so do we think this is a problem for our customers? Does the cloud shadow service ever return null?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
my initial understanding was wrong, cloud shadow service does return null for update accepted topic. verified using the IoT mqtt test client and a real shadow
MikeDombo
reviewed
Oct 10, 2023
| */ | ||
| @Setter | ||
| @JsonIgnore | ||
| private boolean clear; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why? We cannot handle nulls without this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we can, although we use shadowDocument.state a bunch of places in the code. thinking was that this would be better than adding null checks everywhere
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know what it would look like of course, but I think that marking state as @Nullable and then handling the null case would make more sense.
jcosentino11
commented
Oct 10, 2023
| @@ -28,6 +29,7 @@ | |||
| * Class for managing operations on the Shadow Document. | |||
| */ | |||
| @Getter | |||
| @JsonDeserialize(using = ShadowDocumentDeserializer.class) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
using a custom deserializer and new clear field seemed less invasive than allowing ShadowDocument#state to be null, since we'd have to add null checks everywhere ShadowDocument is used
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The document isn't null though right, just state inside the document is null
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah just the state
There was a problem hiding this comment.
did a code search and it's less cases of this than what i thought, will refactor
MikeDombo
reviewed
Oct 10, 2023
src/main/java/com/aws/greengrass/shadowmanager/model/ShadowDocument.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
Unit Tests Coverage Report
Minimum allowed coverage is Generated by 🐒 cobertura-action against fc7890b |
|
Integration Tests Coverage Report
Minimum allowed coverage is Generated by 🐒 cobertura-action against fc7890b |
MikeDombo
approved these changes
Oct 10, 2023
|
Check on the UAT failure as well. https://github.com/aws-greengrass/aws-greengrass-shadow-manager/actions/runs/6475607422/job/17582906225?pr=196 |
yep, still digging in |
Looks unrelated to this PR |
|
aws-greengrass/aws-greengrass-testing#226 |
|
May be related to aws-greengrass/aws-greengrass-testing#226, UAT runs after this have been failing |
saranyailla
approved these changes
Oct 11, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue #, if available:
Description of changes:
Ensure the cloud update document
{"state": null}isn't ignored.Currently, if a null cloud shadow update accepted document is received,
{"state": null}, shadow manager will discard the update, because it thinks no change was made to the cloud state after merging the existing cloud document with{"state": null}:To disambiguate between null and empty, we can explicitly check the update request,
{"state": null}, withinisUpdateNecessary.In order to enable this comparison, we need to allow
ShadowDocument#stateto benull, which required some refactoring to support.Why is this change necessary:
To allow null cloud shadow updates
{"state": null}to be accepted by shadow manager, which will subsequently clear the local shadow.How was this change tested:
A new integration test has been added, and we have UAT coverage as well, which is how the issue was initially discovered.
Any additional information or context required to review the change:
Checklist:
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.