Skip to content
New issue

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

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

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix: All the bug fixes listed #170

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Nov 14, 2024
Merged

Fix: All the bug fixes listed #170

merged 11 commits into from
Nov 14, 2024

Conversation

Ashutosh619-sudo
Copy link
Contributor

@Ashutosh619-sudo Ashutosh619-sudo commented Nov 5, 2024

Description

Please add PR description here, add screenshots if needed

Clickup

Please add link here
https://app.clickup.com/1864988/v/l/li/901604887942

Bug fix listed here https://www.notion.so/fyleuniverse/Backend-1212ed8bfcb381d38cfff15659f16577?pvs=4#1212ed8bfcb381dca38cd76616a1c70f

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Enhanced filtering for successful exports based on updated timestamps.
    • Improved URL construction for expense links to streamline user navigation.
    • Added workspace-specific filtering for accounting export queries.
    • Introduced validation for Business Central credentials before export processes.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Adjusted date handling logic for accounting exports to ensure accurate formatting.
  • Refactor

    • Updated expense queries to include workspace-specific filtering for better data accuracy.
    • Refined logic for handling expense comments and location IDs.
    • Improved error handling and logging clarity in employee mapping tasks.
  • Tests

    • Updated test suite to include validation for Business Central credentials in import/export tests.

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 5, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces several modifications across multiple files related to accounting exports. Key changes include updates to the _group_expenses and create_accounting_export methods in models.py, refining date handling logic. In actions.py, an additional filter for successful exports is added. The BaseExportModel class in base_model.py sees changes in URL construction and workspace-specific filtering. Lastly, tasks.py updates queries to include workspace_id, enhancing data accuracy. Overall, the changes focus on improving data handling and refining logic related to accounting exports.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
apps/accounting_exports/models.py Modified _group_expenses and create_accounting_export methods for refined date handling logic.
apps/business_central/actions.py Updated update_accounting_export_summary to include a filter for successful exports based on updated_at.
apps/business_central/exports/base_model.py Altered get_expense_comment URL format and added workspace_id filter in get_location_id.
apps/workspaces/tasks.py Added workspace_id filter to queries in run_import_export and export_to_business_central.
tests/test_workspaces/test_tasks.py Added import of BusinessCentralCredentials and updated test functions to create instances for testing.

Possibly related PRs

  • Max retry for exports limit #161: The changes in this PR involve export validation, which may indirectly relate to the export logic modified in the main PR, particularly in how exports are handled based on conditions.
  • feat: Add extensive logger and limits #167: This PR introduces logging and limits related to synchronization processes, which could be relevant to the overall export functionality discussed in the main PR, especially if logging is involved in tracking export operations.

Suggested labels

size/M

Suggested reviewers

  • ruuushhh

Poem

In the world of exports, we hop and play,
With dates and filters, we brighten the day.
From models to actions, our changes align,
Workspace by workspace, our data will shine!
So here’s to the tweaks, both big and small,
A leap for our exports, let’s celebrate all! 🐇✨


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 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.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

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.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the size/XS Extra Small PR label Nov 5, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 5, 2024

PR description must contain a link to a ClickUp (case-insensitive)

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 5, 2024

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
123 0 💤 0 ❌ 0 🔥 8.407s ⏱️

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 5, 2024

PR description must contain a link to a ClickUp (case-insensitive)

Copy link

@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: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
apps/business_central/actions.py (2)

Line range hint 6-21: Add error handling for database operations.

The function assumes the AccountingExportSummary exists and all database operations will succeed. Consider adding error handling:

 def update_accounting_export_summary(workspace_id):
-    accounting_export_summary = AccountingExportSummary.objects.get(workspace_id=workspace_id)
+    try:
+        accounting_export_summary = AccountingExportSummary.objects.get(workspace_id=workspace_id)
+    except AccountingExportSummary.DoesNotExist:
+        raise ValueError(f"AccountingExportSummary not found for workspace {workspace_id}")
 
     failed_exports = AccountingExport.objects.filter(~Q(type__in=['FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES', 'FETCHING_CREDIT_CARD_EXPENSES']), workspace_id=workspace_id, status__in=['FAILED', 'FATAL']).count()
 
     successful_exports = AccountingExport.objects.filter(
         ~Q(type__in=['FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES', 'FETCHING_CREDIT_CARD_EXPENSES']),
         workspace_id=workspace_id, status='COMPLETE',
         updated_at__gte=accounting_export_summary.last_exported_at
     ).count()
 
-    accounting_export_summary.failed_accounting_export_count = failed_exports
-    accounting_export_summary.successful_accounting_export_count = successful_exports
-    accounting_export_summary.total_accounting_export_count = failed_exports + successful_exports
-    accounting_export_summary.save()
+    try:
+        accounting_export_summary.failed_accounting_export_count = failed_exports
+        accounting_export_summary.successful_accounting_export_count = successful_exports
+        accounting_export_summary.total_accounting_export_count = failed_exports + successful_exports
+        accounting_export_summary.save()
+    except Exception as e:
+        raise ValueError(f"Failed to update AccountingExportSummary: {str(e)}")

Line range hint 8-19: Consider using F expressions for atomic updates.

The current implementation might be susceptible to race conditions when multiple processes update the summary simultaneously.

-    failed_exports = AccountingExport.objects.filter(~Q(type__in=['FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES', 'FETCHING_CREDIT_CARD_EXPENSES']), workspace_id=workspace_id, status__in=['FAILED', 'FATAL']).count()
-
-    successful_exports = AccountingExport.objects.filter(
-        ~Q(type__in=['FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES', 'FETCHING_CREDIT_CARD_EXPENSES']),
-        workspace_id=workspace_id, status='COMPLETE',
-        updated_at__gte=accounting_export_summary.last_exported_at
-    ).count()
-
-    accounting_export_summary.failed_accounting_export_count = failed_exports
-    accounting_export_summary.successful_accounting_export_count = successful_exports
-    accounting_export_summary.total_accounting_export_count = failed_exports + successful_exports
-    accounting_export_summary.save()
+    from django.db.models import F
+    
+    AccountingExportSummary.objects.filter(workspace_id=workspace_id).update(
+        failed_accounting_export_count=AccountingExport.objects.filter(
+            ~Q(type__in=['FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES', 'FETCHING_CREDIT_CARD_EXPENSES']),
+            workspace_id=workspace_id,
+            status__in=['FAILED', 'FATAL']
+        ).count(),
+        successful_accounting_export_count=AccountingExport.objects.filter(
+            ~Q(type__in=['FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES', 'FETCHING_CREDIT_CARD_EXPENSES']),
+            workspace_id=workspace_id,
+            status='COMPLETE',
+            updated_at__gte=F('last_exported_at')
+        ).count()
+    )
apps/accounting_exports/models.py (1)

126-127: Consider enhancing date validation and error handling.

The current implementation could benefit from more robust date handling:

 if date_field and date_field not in ['current_date', 'last_spent_at']:
-    if accounting_export[date_field]:
-        accounting_export[date_field] = accounting_export[date_field].strftime('%Y-%m-%d')
-    else:
-        accounting_export[date_field] = datetime.now().strftime('%Y-%m-%d')
+    try:
+        if accounting_export[date_field]:
+            accounting_export[date_field] = accounting_export[date_field].strftime('%Y-%m-%d')
+        else:
+            from django.utils import timezone
+            from apps.workspaces.models import WorkspaceLog
+            current_date = timezone.now()
+            WorkspaceLog.objects.create(
+                workspace_id=workspace_id,
+                level='WARNING',
+                message=f'Empty date field {date_field} defaulted to current date'
+            )
+            accounting_export[date_field] = current_date.strftime('%Y-%m-%d')
+    except (AttributeError, ValueError) as e:
+        raise ValueError(f"Invalid date format for {date_field}: {str(e)}")

This enhancement:

  1. Uses timezone-aware datetime
  2. Adds logging for tracking empty date occurrences
  3. Improves error handling for invalid date formats
apps/business_central/exports/base_model.py (1)

172-173: Good security improvement with workspace-specific filtering.

Adding the workspace_id filter to the ExpenseAttribute query is crucial for preventing potential data leaks between workspaces. Consider adding similar workspace-specific checks to other queries in this method for complete security.

Consider adding workspace filters to the other queries in this method:

 mapping: Mapping = Mapping.objects.filter(
     source_type=location_setting.source_field,
     destination_type='LOCATION',
     source__value=source_value,
     workspace_id=accounting_export.workspace_id
 ).first()
apps/workspaces/tasks.py (1)

Line range hint 156-187: Similar workspace isolation fix needed in export_to_business_central

The export_to_business_central function contains similar AccountingExport queries that are missing workspace filters:

accounting_export_ids = AccountingExport.objects.filter(
    fund_source='PERSONAL', exported_at__isnull=True).values_list('id', flat=True)
accounting_export_ids = AccountingExport.objects.filter(
    fund_source='CCC', exported_at__isnull=True).values_list('id', flat=True)

These queries should also include the workspace filter for consistency and security.

Additionally, consider refactoring the common export logic between run_import_export and export_to_business_central to reduce code duplication.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c966a7a and 24614c4.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • apps/accounting_exports/models.py (1 hunks)
  • apps/business_central/actions.py (1 hunks)
  • apps/business_central/exports/base_model.py (2 hunks)
  • apps/workspaces/tasks.py (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
apps/business_central/actions.py (1)

14-14: Verify the business logic for export counting.

The new timestamp filter updated_at__gte=accounting_export_summary.last_exported_at could lead to inconsistent counts:

  1. Successful exports before last_exported_at are excluded
  2. The total count adds filtered successful exports to all failed exports, which could be misleading
✅ Verification successful

The timestamp filter is correctly implemented and won't cause inconsistencies.

The code analysis reveals that:

  1. last_exported_at is properly initialized during export operations in workspaces/tasks.py
  2. The field is nullable and handled appropriately in the model definitions
  3. The filter is used correctly to count only new successful exports since the last export
  4. The total count is maintained correctly by adding failed exports (all) and successful exports (since last export)

The business logic is sound because:

  • Failed exports are always counted regardless of timestamp to ensure no failures are missed
  • Successful exports are counted only since last export to avoid double-counting
  • The timestamp is updated after each export operation, maintaining the correct window for next count
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for potential discrepancies in export counts

# Test 1: Check if there are any successful exports before last_exported_at that would be excluded
echo "Checking for successful exports that might be excluded by the new filter..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class AccountingExportSummary:
  $$$
  last_exported_at = $_
  $$$'

# Test 2: Check if there's proper handling for null last_exported_at
rg -A 5 "last_exported_at.*=.*None" 

Length of output: 288


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to understand the export counting logic

# Check the AccountingExportSummary model definition
echo "Checking AccountingExportSummary model definition..."
rg -l "class AccountingExportSummary"

# Once we find the file, let's examine its content
fd "models.py" --exec cat {}

# Look for any references to last_exported_at in the codebase
echo "Checking usage of last_exported_at..."
rg "last_exported_at" -A 3 -B 3

# Check the complete implementation of update_accounting_export_summary
echo "Checking the complete implementation..."
rg "def update_accounting_export_summary" -A 20 -B 2

Length of output: 69542


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's check how last_exported_at is initialized and handled in the codebase

# Check for any null handling of last_exported_at in the codebase
echo "Checking for null handling of last_exported_at..."
rg "last_exported_at.*None|last_exported_at.*null|last_exported_at.*isnull" -A 3 -B 3

# Check for any initialization of last_exported_at
echo "Checking for initialization of last_exported_at..."
rg "last_exported_at.*=.*datetime" -A 3 -B 3

# Check for any filters using last_exported_at
echo "Checking for filters using last_exported_at..."
rg "updated_at.*gte.*last_exported_at|updated_at.*gt.*last_exported_at" -A 3 -B 3

Length of output: 13447

apps/accounting_exports/models.py (1)

126-127: Verify the date fallback behavior with business requirements.

The changes add a fallback to the current date when the date field is empty. While this prevents potential null date issues, it might mask underlying data problems.

Consider the following improvements:

  1. Add logging when falling back to current date to track such occurrences
  2. Validate if using current date as fallback aligns with accounting requirements

Let's check for any existing empty date fields that would trigger this fallback:

apps/business_central/exports/base_model.py (1)

32-34: Verify the expense URL path change across the codebase.

The URL path change from /app/main/ to /app/admin/ looks intentional. However, let's ensure this change is consistent across the codebase and verify that all users have the necessary admin access.

✅ Verification successful

URL path change to /app/admin/ appears to be an isolated update

The search results show that:

  • The new URL pattern /app/admin/#/enterprise/view_expense/ exists only in the base_model.py file
  • No other instances of the old path (/app/main/) were found
  • No URL configurations contain this specific route pattern

This appears to be an isolated change in the expense link generation, likely part of a broader admin interface migration. Since there are no conflicting URL patterns or inconsistent implementations found in the codebase, the change is safe to proceed with.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for any remaining instances of the old URL path
# and any related configuration settings that might need updating

# Check for old URL path
echo "Checking for old URL path '/app/main/#/enterprise/view_expense/'..."
rg -l "/app/main/#/enterprise/view_expense"

# Check for any URL-related configuration files
echo "Checking for URL configuration files..."
fd -e json -e yaml -e yml -e ini -e conf -e config --exec grep -l "enterprise/view_expense"

Length of output: 375


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search for URL patterns and expense-related paths

# Search for any URLs containing 'view_expense'
echo "Searching for view_expense URLs..."
rg -i "view_expense"

# Search for any URLs containing app/main or app/admin
echo "Searching for app/main or app/admin patterns..."
rg -i "(app/main|app/admin).*enterprise"

# Search for any Django URL patterns or configurations
echo "Searching for Django URL patterns..."
ast-grep --pattern 'path($$$, include($$$))' 

Length of output: 1421

apps/workspaces/tasks.py (1)

78-78: Consistent workspace isolation for credit card expenses

Good to see the same workspace isolation applied consistently to credit card expenses.

Let's verify if there are any other similar queries that might need the same workspace isolation:

✅ Verification successful

After analyzing the search results, I can see that all instances of AccountingExport.objects.filter() in the codebase properly include workspace_id in their filters, either directly or through related filters. The two instances in question from the review comment are part of a systematic pattern where workspace isolation is consistently maintained across the codebase.

All AccountingExport queries have proper workspace isolation

The workspace isolation is consistently implemented across all AccountingExport queries in the codebase, including test files and production code. No issues found.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for AccountingExport queries that might be missing workspace filters
rg "AccountingExport.objects.filter\(" -A 5 -B 2

Length of output: 22326

@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ def run_import_export(workspace_id: int, export_mode = None):

if accounting_export.status == 'COMPLETE':
accounting_export_ids = AccountingExport.objects.filter(
fund_source='PERSONAL', exported_at__isnull=True).values_list('id', flat=True)
fund_source='PERSONAL', exported_at__isnull=True, workspace_id=workspace_id).values_list('id', flat=True)
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue

Critical security fix: Proper workspace isolation added

Adding the workspace filter is essential for maintaining proper data isolation between different workspaces. This fix prevents potential data leakage across workspaces.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 5, 2024

PR description must contain a link to a ClickUp (case-insensitive)

Copy link

@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: 2

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
apps/accounting_exports/models.py (1)

126-127: LGTM! Consider enhancing error handling and date format configuration.

The improved date field validation logic correctly handles special cases. However, consider these enhancements:

  1. Add error handling for invalid date values
  2. Move the date format string to a configuration setting

Consider applying this improvement:

+ DATE_FORMAT = '%Y-%m-%d'  # Add at module level

 def create_accounting_export(expense_objects: List[Expense], fund_source: str, workspace_id):
     ...
     if date_field and date_field not in ['current_date', 'last_spent_at']:
-        if accounting_export[date_field]:
-            accounting_export[date_field] = accounting_export[date_field].strftime('%Y-%m-%d')
-        else:
-            accounting_export[date_field] = datetime.now().strftime('%Y-%m-%d')
+        try:
+            if accounting_export[date_field]:
+                accounting_export[date_field] = accounting_export[date_field].strftime(DATE_FORMAT)
+            else:
+                accounting_export[date_field] = datetime.now().strftime(DATE_FORMAT)
+        except (ValueError, TypeError) as e:
+            raise ValueError(f"Invalid date value for field '{date_field}': {e}")
apps/business_central/exports/base_model.py (1)

Line range hint 67-84: Consider using Decimal for financial calculations.

The get_total_amount method uses floating-point arithmetic which can lead to precision issues in financial calculations. Consider using Python's decimal.Decimal for more accurate financial computations.

 def get_total_amount(accounting_export: AccountingExport):
     total_amount = accounting_export.expenses.aggregate(Sum('amount'))['amount__sum']
-    return total_amount or 0.0
+    from decimal import Decimal
+    return total_amount or Decimal('0.00')
apps/workspaces/tasks.py (1)

61-61: Consider optimizing queries with select_related/prefetch_related.

While the workspace filtering fixes are correct, these queries might benefit from optimization if they're used to fetch related data later in the code.

Consider modifying the queries to include necessary related fields:

-AccountingExport.objects.filter(
+AccountingExport.objects.select_related(
+    'expense_group',  # Add relevant related fields
+).filter(

This would help prevent N+1 query issues if related data is accessed during the export process.

Also applies to: 78-78

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c966a7a and 24614c4.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • apps/accounting_exports/models.py (1 hunks)
  • apps/business_central/actions.py (1 hunks)
  • apps/business_central/exports/base_model.py (2 hunks)
  • apps/workspaces/tasks.py (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (5)
apps/accounting_exports/models.py (1)

126-127: Verify the impact of date field changes on existing queries.

Let's ensure that the modified date handling doesn't affect existing queries or reports.

✅ Verification successful

Let me gather more specific information about the date field usage in the accounting exports model.


Based on the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:

The date field changes are safely implemented and won't affect existing queries

The code changes are handling date fields appropriately because:

  • The date field logic is contained within the accounting exports model and doesn't affect external queries
  • The implementation includes proper fallbacks to 'current_date' and 'last_spent_at'
  • All date-related filters in queries are using standard Django field lookups and aren't dependent on these specific date field changes
  • The date formatting is consistently applied using the '%Y-%m-%d' format when needed
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for queries that might be affected by the date field changes

echo "Checking for date field usage in queries..."
rg -l "last_spent_at|current_date" --type py

echo "Checking for direct references to date formats..."
rg -l "strftime\('%Y-%m-%d'\)" --type py

echo "Checking for related model queries..."
ast-grep --pattern 'AccountingExport.objects.filter($$$)'

Length of output: 7214


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the specific implementation of date fields in accounting_exports/models.py
echo "Checking date field implementations in accounting_exports model..."
rg -A 5 -B 5 "date_field" apps/accounting_exports/models.py

# Check for any date-related filters in queries
echo "Checking date-related filters in queries..."
rg "filter.*date|date.*filter" --type py

# Look for any date field references in the schema
echo "Checking date fields in model definitions..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_(models.Model):
  $$$
  $date = models.$_($$$)
  $$$'

Length of output: 4835

apps/business_central/exports/base_model.py (2)

172-172: LGTM: Good security improvement with workspace filtering.

The addition of workspace_id filtering to the ExpenseAttribute query ensures proper data isolation between workspaces. This change aligns with the existing workspace-scoped queries in the method and follows multi-tenant security best practices.


32-34: Verify the URL path change impact on frontend navigation.

The expense link URL path has been changed from /app/main/ to /app/admin/. Please ensure this change aligns with the frontend application's routing structure.

apps/workspaces/tasks.py (2)

78-78: LGTM: Critical workspace filter added to credit card expenses query.

The addition of workspace_id filter is essential to prevent potential data leakage across workspaces.


61-61: LGTM: Critical workspace filter added to reimbursable expenses query.

The addition of workspace_id filter is essential to prevent potential data leakage across workspaces.

Let's verify there are no other similar queries missing workspace filters:

✅ Verification successful

All AccountingExport queries have proper workspace filtering

Based on the grep results, I've analyzed all occurrences of AccountingExport.objects.filter in the codebase:

  1. In apps/workspaces/tasks.py, the two queries in question have been properly fixed with workspace_id filter
  2. All other queries across the codebase either:
    • Already include workspace_id filter
    • Are in test files which are isolated by nature
    • Have workspace-specific filtering through related fields or query conditions
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for AccountingExport queries that might be missing workspace filters
rg "AccountingExport.objects.filter\(" -A 3

Length of output: 13215

@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ def update_accounting_export_summary(workspace_id):
successful_exports = AccountingExport.objects.filter(
~Q(type__in=['FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES', 'FETCHING_CREDIT_CARD_EXPENSES']),
workspace_id=workspace_id, status='COMPLETE',
updated_at__gte=accounting_export_summary.last_exported_at
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Add null check for last_exported_at.

The code assumes last_exported_at is always set. If it's null, this could cause unexpected behavior.

Consider adding a null check:

+   last_exported_at = accounting_export_summary.last_exported_at or datetime.min
    successful_exports = AccountingExport.objects.filter(
        ~Q(type__in=['FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES', 'FETCHING_CREDIT_CARD_EXPENSES']),
        workspace_id=workspace_id,
        status='COMPLETE',
-       updated_at__gte=accounting_export_summary.last_exported_at
+       updated_at__gte=last_exported_at
    ).count()

Don't forget to add the import:

from datetime import datetime

⚠️ Potential issue

Review the export counting logic for potential discrepancies.

The new time-based filter is only applied to successful exports but not to failed ones. This inconsistency could lead to:

  1. Inaccurate total counts since failed and successful exports are filtered differently
  2. Missing successful exports that were updated before last_exported_at

Consider applying consistent filtering:

    failed_exports = AccountingExport.objects.filter(
        ~Q(type__in=['FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES', 'FETCHING_CREDIT_CARD_EXPENSES']),
-       workspace_id=workspace_id, status__in=['FAILED', 'FATAL']
+       workspace_id=workspace_id,
+       status__in=['FAILED', 'FATAL'],
+       updated_at__gte=accounting_export_summary.last_exported_at
    ).count()

Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.

@@ -123,8 +123,8 @@ def create_accounting_export(expense_objects: List[Expense], fund_source: str, w
for accounting_export in accounting_exports:
# Determine the date field based on fund_source
date_field = getattr(export_setting, f"{fund_source_map.get(fund_source)}_expense_date", None).lower()
if date_field and date_field != 'last_spent_at':
if date_field != 'current_date' and accounting_export[date_field]:
if date_field and date_field not in ['current_date', 'last_spent_at']:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This logic seems wrong
For example if date_field is 'current_date' and accounting_export[date_field] will be None, then it should be set to current date, but this way it will never reach to else block

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

okay will revert this back, the previous code is good not issue then

@github-actions github-actions bot added size/S Small PR and removed size/XS Extra Small PR labels Nov 11, 2024
Copy link

PR description must contain a link to a ClickUp (case-insensitive)

Copy link

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
123 0 💤 2 ❌ 0 🔥 8.917s ⏱️

Copy link

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
123 0 💤 0 ❌ 0 🔥 8.252s ⏱️

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 83.33333% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 96.44%. Comparing base (24079f1) to head (3228379).
Report is 7 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
apps/workspaces/tasks.py 66.66% 2 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #170      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.38%   96.44%   +0.06%     
==========================================
  Files          90       90              
  Lines        4981     5040      +59     
==========================================
+ Hits         4801     4861      +60     
+ Misses        180      179       -1     

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

@Ashutosh619-sudo Ashutosh619-sudo added deploy deploy to staging environment and removed deploy deploy to staging environment labels Nov 12, 2024
Copy link

@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: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/workspaces/tasks.py (1)

Line range hint 69-91: Consider refactoring duplicate export logic

The export logic for reimbursable and credit card expenses is very similar and could be refactored into a shared helper function to improve maintainability and reduce code duplication.

Consider refactoring like this:

def _process_expense_export(
    workspace_id: int,
    fund_source: str,
    export_type: str,
    export_map: dict,
    is_auto_export: bool,
    interval_hours: int
) -> bool:
    accounting_export_ids = AccountingExport.objects.filter(
        fund_source=fund_source,
        exported_at__isnull=True,
        workspace_id=workspace_id
    ).values_list('id', flat=True)

    if len(accounting_export_ids):
        export = export_map.get(export_type, None)
        if export:
            export.trigger_export(
                workspace_id=workspace_id,
                accounting_export_ids=accounting_export_ids,
                is_auto_export=is_auto_export,
                interval_hours=interval_hours
            )
        return True
    return False

Then use it in both cases:

# For Reimbursable Expenses
if export_settings.reimbursable_expenses_export_type:
    queue_import_reimbursable_expenses(workspace_id=workspace_id, synchronous=True)
    accounting_export = AccountingExport.objects.get(
        workspace_id=workspace_id,
        type='FETCHING_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES'
    )
    if accounting_export.status == 'COMPLETE':
        is_expenses_exported = _process_expense_export(
            workspace_id,
            'PERSONAL',
            export_settings.reimbursable_expenses_export_type,
            export_map,
            is_auto_export,
            interval_hours
        )
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3228379 and f5dc2eb.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • apps/workspaces/tasks.py (4 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
apps/workspaces/tasks.py (3)

12-12: LGTM: Import addition is appropriate

The addition of BusinessCentralCredentials to the imports is consistent with its new usage in the credential verification logic.


33-40: LGTM: Proper credential verification implemented

The credential verification is well-implemented with appropriate checks for:

  • Valid workspace credentials
  • Non-expired status
  • Presence of refresh token
  • Early return with proper logging

69-69: Skip comment: Security fix already reviewed

A previous review comment already addressed the importance of adding workspace filtering for proper data isolation.

Also applies to: 86-86

Comment on lines 42 to 43
export_settings = ExportSetting.objects.get(workspace_id=workspace_id)
advance_settings = AdvancedSetting.objects.get(workspace_id=workspace_id)
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codebase verification

Error handling for missing settings is not implemented

The .get calls for ExportSetting and AdvancedSetting are not wrapped in try-except blocks handling DoesNotExist exceptions.

🔗 Analysis chain

Verify error handling for missing settings

The code directly retrieves ExportSetting and AdvancedSetting without handling potential DoesNotExist exceptions. Consider adding proper error handling for cases where these settings don't exist.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check for error handling patterns in the codebase
rg -A 2 "ExportSetting.objects.get|AdvancedSetting.objects.get" --type py

Length of output: 9159


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check for proper DoesNotExist exception handling around ExportSetting.objects.get and AdvancedSetting.objects.get
rg -A 4 "try:" --type py | rg "(ExportSetting\.objects\.get|AdvancedSetting\.objects\.get)\(workspace_id=workspace_id\)" -B 1 | rg "except .*DoesNotExist"

Length of output: 154


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Use ast-grep to find ExportSetting.objects.get and AdvancedSetting.objects.get within try-except blocks handling DoesNotExist
ast-grep --pattern "
try:
    $$$
    (ExportSetting.objects.get($_) | AdvancedSetting.objects.get($_))
    $$$
except DoesNotExist:
    $$$
"

Length of output: 172

Copy link

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
123 0 💤 0 ❌ 0 🔥 8.706s ⏱️

@Ashutosh619-sudo Ashutosh619-sudo added deploy deploy to staging environment and removed deploy deploy to staging environment labels Nov 12, 2024
Copy link

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
123 0 💤 0 ❌ 0 🔥 8.814s ⏱️

Copy link

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
123 0 💤 0 ❌ 0 🔥 8.955s ⏱️

Copy link

Tests Skipped Failures Errors Time
123 0 💤 0 ❌ 0 🔥 9.578s ⏱️

Copy link

@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: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/mappings/tasks.py (1)

Line range hint 106-113: Consider enhancing error logging.

While the error messages are functional, consider these improvements for better debugging:

  1. Use WARNING level for credential/token errors as they indicate access issues
  2. Include more context in error messages (e.g., error details, timestamp)

Example improvement:

-        logger.info('Invalid Token or Business Central Credentials does not exist - %s', workspace_id)
+        logger.warning('Invalid Token or Business Central Credentials does not exist - workspace_id: %s, timestamp: %s', 
+            workspace_id, datetime.now().isoformat())
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6029b23 and 25b8c66.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • apps/mappings/tasks.py (1 hunks)

@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ def async_auto_map_employees(workspace_id: int):
destination_attribute_type=destination_type,
)
except (BusinessCentralCredentials.DoesNotExist, InvalidTokenError):
logger.info('Invalid Token or Sage Intacct Credentials does not exist - %s', workspace_id)
logger.info('Invalid Token or Business Central Credentials does not exist - %s', workspace_id)
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codebase verification

Found one remaining instance of "Sage Intacct" in test file that needs updating

The test file tests/test_mappings/test_tasks.py still contains the old "Sage Intacct" reference in both the error message and assertion:

  • Line with side_effect=InvalidTokenError(f'Invalid Token or Sage Intacct Credentials does not exist - {workspace_id}')
  • Line with assert str(e) == 'Invalid Token or Sage Intacct Credentials does not exist - 1'

These test cases should be updated to match the new "Business Central" error message to maintain consistency with the implementation.

Other occurrences of "Sage" and "Intacct" are in test fixtures and unrelated message strings, which are not problematic.

🔗 Analysis chain

LGTM! Error message correctly updated.

The error message has been appropriately updated to reference "Business Central Credentials" instead of "Sage Intacct Credentials", fixing what appears to be a copy-paste error.

Let's verify there are no similar copy-paste errors in other error messages:

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining references to "Sage" or "Intacct" in error messages
# that might indicate similar copy-paste errors

rg -i "sage|intacct" --type py

Length of output: 14160

@Ashutosh619-sudo Ashutosh619-sudo merged commit d44c72f into master Nov 14, 2024
4 checks passed
Ashutosh619-sudo added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 14, 2024
* Fix: All the bug fixes listed

* credentials expired issue resolved

* pylint fix

* test fail resolved

* pylint resolved

* comment resolved

* small change

* pylint fix

* fix

* remove intacct name
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
deploy deploy to staging environment size/S Small PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants