Skip to content

G
gitlab-ce
Commit 6cf013f6 authored by Mayra Cabrera's avatar Mayra Cabrera
Browse files
Options

Merge branch 'revert-1ef53665' into 'master' 

Revert "Add section to approval rule name index"

See merge request gitlab-org/gitlab!34679
parents ef375215 0ce36429
Hide whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
Showing with 4 additions and 266 deletions
changelogs/unreleased/215194-add-section-to-index_approval_rule_name_for_code_owners_rule_type.yml deleted 100644 → 0
View file @ ef375215
---
title: Add :section to approval_merge_request_rule unique index
merge_request: 33121
author:
type: other
db/migrate/20200526231421_update_index_approval_rule_name_for_code_owners_rule_type.rb deleted 100644 → 0
View file @ ef375215
# frozen_string_literal: true
class UpdateIndexApprovalRuleNameForCodeOwnersRuleType < ActiveRecord::Migration[6.0]
include Gitlab::Database::MigrationHelpers
DOWNTIME = false
disable_ddl_transaction!
LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_RULE_TYPE = "index_approval_rule_name_for_code_owners_rule_type"
LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_CODE_OWNERS = "approval_rule_name_index_for_code_owners"
SECTIONAL_INDEX_NAME = "index_approval_rule_name_for_sectional_code_owners_rule_type"
CODE_OWNER_RULE_TYPE = 2
def up
unless index_exists_by_name?(:approval_merge_request_rules, SECTIONAL_INDEX_NAME)
# Ensure only 1 code_owner rule with the same name and section per merge_request
#
add_concurrent_index(
:approval_merge_request_rules,
[:merge_request_id, :name, :section],
unique: true,
where: "rule_type = #{CODE_OWNER_RULE_TYPE}",
name: SECTIONAL_INDEX_NAME
)
end
remove_concurrent_index_by_name :approval_merge_request_rules, LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_RULE_TYPE
remove_concurrent_index_by_name :approval_merge_request_rules, LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_CODE_OWNERS
add_concurrent_index(
:approval_merge_request_rules,
[:merge_request_id, :name],
unique: true,
where: "rule_type = #{CODE_OWNER_RULE_TYPE} AND section IS NULL",
name: LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_RULE_TYPE
)
add_concurrent_index(
:approval_merge_request_rules,
[:merge_request_id, :code_owner, :name],
unique: true,
where: "code_owner = true AND section IS NULL",
name: LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_CODE_OWNERS
)
end
def down
# In a rollback situation, we can't guarantee that there will not be
# records that were allowed under the more specific SECTIONAL_INDEX_NAME
# index but would cause uniqueness violations under both the
# LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_RULE_TYPE and LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_CODE_OWNERS indices.
# Therefore, we need to first find all the MergeRequests with
# ApprovalMergeRequestRules that would violate these "new" indices and
# delete those approval rules, then create the new index, then finally
# recreate the approval rules for those merge requests.
#
# First, find all MergeRequests with ApprovalMergeRequestRules that will
# violate the new index.
#
merge_request_ids = ApprovalMergeRequestRule
.select(:merge_request_id)
.where(rule_type: CODE_OWNER_RULE_TYPE)
.group(:merge_request_id, :rule_type, :name)
.includes(:merge_request)
.having("count(*) > 1")
.collect(&:merge_request_id)
# Delete ALL their code_owner approval rules
#
merge_request_ids.each_slice(10) do |ids|
ApprovalMergeRequestRule.where(merge_request_id: ids).code_owner.delete_all
end
# Remove legacy partial indices that only apply to `section IS NULL` records
#
remove_concurrent_index_by_name :approval_merge_request_rules, LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_RULE_TYPE
remove_concurrent_index_by_name :approval_merge_request_rules, LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_CODE_OWNERS
# Reconstruct original "legacy" indices
#
add_concurrent_index(
:approval_merge_request_rules,
[:merge_request_id, :name],
unique: true,
where: "rule_type = #{CODE_OWNER_RULE_TYPE}",
name: LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_RULE_TYPE
)
add_concurrent_index(
:approval_merge_request_rules,
[:merge_request_id, :code_owner, :name],
unique: true,
where: "code_owner = true",
name: LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_CODE_OWNERS
)
# MergeRequest::SyncCodeOwnerApprovalRules recreates the code_owner rules
# from scratch, adding them to the index. Duplicates will be rejected.
#
merge_request_ids.each_slice(10) do |ids|
MergeRequest.where(id: ids).each do |merge_request|
MergeRequests::SyncCodeOwnerApprovalRules.new(merge_request).execute
end
end
remove_concurrent_index_by_name :approval_merge_request_rules, SECTIONAL_INDEX_NAME
end
end
db/structure.sql
View file @ 6cf013f6
......@@ -9156,7 +9156,7 @@ CREATE UNIQUE INDEX any_approver_merge_request_rule_type_unique_index ON public.
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX any_approver_project_rule_type_unique_index ON public.approval_project_rules USING btree (project_id) WHERE (rule_type = 3);
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX approval_rule_name_index_for_code_owners ON public.approval_merge_request_rules USING btree (merge_request_id, code_owner, name) WHERE ((code_owner = true) AND (section IS NULL));
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX approval_rule_name_index_for_code_owners ON public.approval_merge_request_rules USING btree (merge_request_id, code_owner, name) WHERE (code_owner = true);
CREATE INDEX ci_builds_gitlab_monitor_metrics ON public.ci_builds USING btree (status, created_at, project_id) WHERE ((type)::text = 'Ci::Build'::text);
......@@ -9334,9 +9334,7 @@ CREATE UNIQUE INDEX index_approval_project_rules_users_1 ON public.approval_proj
CREATE INDEX index_approval_project_rules_users_2 ON public.approval_project_rules_users USING btree (user_id);
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX index_approval_rule_name_for_code_owners_rule_type ON public.approval_merge_request_rules USING btree (merge_request_id, name) WHERE ((rule_type = 2) AND (section IS NULL));
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX index_approval_rule_name_for_sectional_code_owners_rule_type ON public.approval_merge_request_rules USING btree (merge_request_id, name, section) WHERE (rule_type = 2);
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX index_approval_rule_name_for_code_owners_rule_type ON public.approval_merge_request_rules USING btree (merge_request_id, name) WHERE (rule_type = 2);
CREATE INDEX index_approval_rules_code_owners_rule_type ON public.approval_merge_request_rules USING btree (merge_request_id) WHERE (rule_type = 2);
......@@ -13963,7 +13961,6 @@ COPY "schema_migrations" (version) FROM STDIN;
20200526153844
20200526164946
20200526164947
20200526231421
20200527092027
20200527094322
20200527095401
......
ee/spec/models/approval_merge_request_rule_spec.rb
View file @ 6cf013f6
......@@ -45,9 +45,9 @@ RSpec.describe ApprovalMergeRequestRule do
end
it 'is invalid when reusing the same name within the same merge request' do
existing = create(:code_owner_rule, name: '*.rb', merge_request: merge_request, section: 'section')
existing = create(:code_owner_rule, name: '*.rb', merge_request: merge_request)
new = build(:code_owner_rule, merge_request: existing.merge_request, name: '*.rb', section: 'section')
new = build(:code_owner_rule, merge_request: existing.merge_request, name: '*.rb')
expect(new).not_to be_valid
expect { new.save!(validate: false) }.to raise_error(ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique)
......
spec/migrations/20200526231421_update_index_approval_rule_name_for_code_owners_rule_type_spec.rb deleted 100644 → 0
View file @ ef375215
# frozen_string_literal: true
require 'spec_helper'
require Rails.root.join('db', 'migrate', '20200526231421_update_index_approval_rule_name_for_code_owners_rule_type.rb')
describe UpdateIndexApprovalRuleNameForCodeOwnersRuleType do
let(:migration) { described_class.new }
let(:approval_rules) { table(:approval_merge_request_rules) }
let(:namespace) { table(:namespaces).create!(name: 'gitlab', path: 'gitlab') }
let(:project) do
table(:projects).create!(
namespace_id: namespace.id,
name: 'gitlab',
path: 'gitlab'
)
end
let(:merge_request) do
table(:merge_requests).create!(
target_project_id: project.id,
source_project_id: project.id,
target_branch: 'feature',
source_branch: 'master'
)
end
let(:index_names) do
ActiveRecord::Base.connection
.indexes(:approval_merge_request_rules)
.collect(&:name)
end
def create_sectional_approval_rules
approval_rules.create!(
merge_request_id: merge_request.id,
name: "*.rb",
code_owner: true,
rule_type: 2,
section: "First Section"
)
approval_rules.create!(
merge_request_id: merge_request.id,
name: "*.rb",
code_owner: true,
rule_type: 2,
section: "Second Section"
)
end
def create_two_matching_nil_section_approval_rules
2.times do
approval_rules.create!(
merge_request_id: merge_request.id,
name: "nil_section",
code_owner: true,
rule_type: 2
)
end
end
before do
approval_rules.delete_all
end
describe "#up" do
it "creates the new index and removes the 'legacy' indices" do
# Confirm that existing legacy indices prevent duplicate entries
#
expect { create_sectional_approval_rules }
.to raise_exception(ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique)
expect { create_two_matching_nil_section_approval_rules }
.to raise_exception(ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique)
approval_rules.delete_all
disable_migrations_output { migrate! }
# After running the migration, expect `section == nil` rules to still
# be blocked by the legacy indices, but sectional rules are allowed.
#
expect { create_sectional_approval_rules }
.to change { approval_rules.count }.by(2)
expect { create_two_matching_nil_section_approval_rules }
.to raise_exception(ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique)
# Attempt to rerun the creation of sectional rules, and see that sectional
# rules are unique by section
#
expect { create_sectional_approval_rules }
.to raise_exception(ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique)
expect(index_names).to include(
described_class::SECTIONAL_INDEX_NAME,
described_class::LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_RULE_TYPE,
described_class::LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_CODE_OWNERS
)
end
end
describe "#down" do
it "recreates 'legacy' indices and removes duplicate code owner approval rules" do
disable_migrations_output { migrate! }
expect { create_sectional_approval_rules }
.to change { approval_rules.count }.by(2)
expect { create_two_matching_nil_section_approval_rules }
.to raise_exception(ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique)
# Run the down migration. This will remove the 2 approval rules we create
# above, and call MergeRequests::SyncCodeOwnerApprovalRules to recreate
# new ones.
#
expect(MergeRequests::SyncCodeOwnerApprovalRules)
.to receive(:new).with(MergeRequest.find(merge_request.id)).once.and_call_original
# We expect approval_rules.count to be changed by -2 as we're deleting the
# 3 rules created above, and MergeRequests::SyncCodeOwnerApprovalRules
# will not be able to create new one with an empty (or missing)
# CODEOWNERS file.
#
expect { disable_migrations_output { migration.down } }
.to change { approval_rules.count }.by(-3)
# Test that the index does not allow us to create the same rules as the
# previous sectional index.
#
expect { create_sectional_approval_rules }
.to raise_exception(ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique)
expect { create_two_matching_nil_section_approval_rules }
.to raise_exception(ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique)
expect(index_names).not_to include(described_class::SECTIONAL_INDEX_NAME)
expect(index_names).to include(
described_class::LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_RULE_TYPE,
described_class::LEGACY_INDEX_NAME_CODE_OWNERS
)
end
end
end
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment
GitLab Nexedi Edition | About GitLab | About Nexedi | 沪ICP备2021021310号-2 | 沪ICP备2021021310号-7