Users/amit909sin/issue 195 #219
Conversation
* Wrap ActiveRecord::Base with ActiveSupport.on_load * Test inspect method filters senstive column values * Remove set secret_token and secret_key_base in spec_helper.rb * Comment reason of filter_parameters in spec_helper.rb
* Adds Changelog entries for 2.3.0 * Updates version into 2.3.0 in version file * Adds minimum coverage as 80 to be able to change version
* fix logic inside the tenant_klass_defined method * add tests for tenant_klass_defined? * fix failed tests * rubocop -a * remove unnecessary word * add a test case for the following citusdata#105 * test a more appropriate class * add multi_tenant * Fixes rubocop warnings --------- Co-authored-by: Gürkan İndibay <[email protected]>
Bumps [certifi](https://github.com/certifi/python-certifi) from 2023.5.7 to 2023.7.22. - [Commits](certifi/python-certifi@2023.05.07...2023.07.22) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: certifi dependency-type: indirect ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
* Add rails 7.1.0.beta1 * Support Rails7.1 The `table_name` method was defined in `Arel::Nodes::Table` and `Arel::Nodes::TableAlias` to get the table name, but `Arel::Nodes::Table#table_name` was removed rails/rails#46864. Therefore, it is no longer possible to simply call `#table_name` to get `table_name`, so a `TableNode.table_name` has been added to get table_name from node.
Bumps [urllib3](https://github.com/urllib3/urllib3) from 2.0.2 to 2.0.6. - [Release notes](https://github.com/urllib3/urllib3/releases) - [Changelog](https://github.com/urllib3/urllib3/blob/main/CHANGES.rst) - [Commits](urllib3/urllib3@2.0.2...2.0.6) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: urllib3 dependency-type: indirect ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Bumps [urllib3](https://github.com/urllib3/urllib3) from 2.0.6 to 2.0.7. - [Release notes](https://github.com/urllib3/urllib3/releases) - [Changelog](https://github.com/urllib3/urllib3/blob/main/CHANGES.rst) - [Commits](urllib3/urllib3@2.0.6...2.0.7) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: urllib3 dependency-type: indirect ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Enable more
|
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Microsoft"
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Microsoft" |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## issue_195 #219 +/- ##
============================================
Coverage ? 84.04%
============================================
Files ? 16
Lines ? 746
Branches ? 0
============================================
Hits ? 627
Misses ? 119
Partials ? 0 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
@serprex One of the checks is failing Rubocop on the file model_extension.rb. I didn't touch this file. Should I fix it, in order to get the checks, pass successfully. Also, I am currently pushing my changes to |
|
Yes, please fix. @gurkanindibay would merge; I no longer work at Microsoft |
| @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ | |||
| # activerecord-multi-tenant [](https://github.com/citusdata/activerecord-multi-tenant/actions/workflows/active-record-multi-tenant-tests.yml) [](https://codecov.io/gh/citusdata/activerecord-multi-tenant) [ ](https://rubygems.org/gems/activerecord-multi-tenant)[ ](https://rubygems.org/gems/activerecord-multi-tenant) [](https://activerecord-multi-tenant.readthedocs.io/en/latest/?badge=latest) | |||
| # activerecord-multi-tenant | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why there are multiple empty lines here?
| execute "ALTER TABLE #{table_name} ADD PRIMARY KEY(\"#{options[:partition_key]}\", id)" | ||
| end | ||
| ret | ||
| module MultiTenant |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I couldn't understand why this change is required. Could you clarify?
|
@Amit909Singh Great work! I appreciate your contribution. However, I would like additional clarification in the code to better grasp the rationale behind each modification. It seems you've made some valuable style and code enhancements, although they may not be directly tied to the issue at hand. While this is positive, I find it challenging to comprehend each specific change in this pull request. Providing more details will enable me to thoroughly review the issue. Thank you once again for your excellent effort. |
Hi @gurkanindibay, I found your draft PR to address delete_all issue. I fork from your branch, but it was couple of months old and merge latest changes from the master. My changes are under my commits. Main changes are in delete_operations.rb |
* Fix the tenant scoping for delete_all
… incorrect query (#200) * Adds initial implementation but still failing * Users/amit909sin/issue 195 (#219) * Fix the tenant scoping for delete_all --------- Co-authored-by: amit909singh <[email protected]>
Merging changes from master and fixing tenant scoping for delete_all