rfq api cache

[trajan0x]

Description

add auth cache to rfq api

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Improved role management in the API server with efficient caching for enhanced performance and security.

• Improvements

  • Updated authentication middleware to leverage the new caching system for quicker role verification.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The recent update optimizes efficiency by introducing a roleCache in the QuoterAPIServer, streamlining role checking in the authorization process. This cache, initialized per chain ID, is seamlessly integrated into AuthMiddleware for rapid role data retrieval, reducing overhead and improving response times.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
.../api/rest/server.go	Added roleCache to QuoterAPIServer, updated NewAPI for cache setup, and modified AuthMiddleware to utilize the cache efficiently.

🐰✨📝
A cache was born in the server's heart,
Storing roles, playing a smart part.
Tick-tock, clean and sweep,
Every minute, it does not sleep.
Hopping faster, the server now leaps!
🌟🐇

---

Recent Review Details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 43ff96b and 942d683.

Files selected for processing (1)

• services/rfq/api/rest/server.go (6 hunks)

Additional Context Used

GitHub Check Runs (1)

codecov/patch success (1)

services/rfq/api/rest/server.go: [warning] 174-176: services/rfq/api/rest/server.go#L174-L176
Added lines #L174 - L176 were not covered by tests

Additional comments not posted (3)

services/rfq/api/rest/server.go (3)

39-39: Added roleCache field to QuoterAPIServer struct to enable caching of role verifications.

---

Line range hint 67-97: Initialization of roleCache for each chain ID in NewAPI function is well-implemented, ensuring efficient role verification.

---

165-181: Refactored role checking logic in AuthMiddleware to utilize roleCache. This change reduces complexity and improves performance by avoiding repeated on-chain checks.

---

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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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>.
  • 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 generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @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.

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 as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration 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.

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying sanguine-fe with    Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit:	942d683
Status:	✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL:	https://c3e3a245.sanguine-fe.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL:	https://fix-rfq-api-ache.sanguine-fe.pages.dev

View logs

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

Out of diff range and nitpick comments (2)

services/rfq/api/rest/server.go (2)

39-39: Add documentation for the roleCache field in the QuoterAPIServer struct.

It's good practice to document the purpose and usage of each field in a struct, especially for complex features like caching mechanisms.

---

113-113: Consider moving the cacheInterval constant closer to its usage context.

Defining constants close to where they are used can improve code readability and maintainability. Currently, cacheInterval is defined far from its first usage, which might confuse developers unfamiliar with the codebase.

[coderabbitai]

Refactor the role checking logic in AuthMiddleware to reduce complexity.

-		hasRole := r.roleCache[uint32(req.DestChainID)].Get(addressRecovered.Hex())
-		if hasRole == nil || hasRole.IsExpired() {
-			has, err := bridge.HasRole(ops, relayerRole, addressRecovered)
-			if err == nil {
-				r.roleCache[uint32(req.DestChainID)].Set(addressRecovered.Hex(), has, cacheInterval)
-			}
-			if err != nil {
-				c.JSON(http.StatusBadRequest, gin.H{"msg": "unable to check relayer role on-chain"})
-				c.Abort()
-				return
-			} else if !has {
-				c.JSON(http.StatusBadRequest, gin.H{"msg": "q.Relayer not an on-chain relayer"})
-				c.Abort()
-				return
-			}
-		}
+		// Simplified role checking logic
+		addressHex := addressRecovered.Hex()
+		hasRole, found := r.roleCache[uint32(req.DestChainID)].Get(addressHex)
+		if !found || hasRole.IsExpired() {
+			has, err := bridge.HasRole(ops, relayerRole, addressRecovered)
+			if err != nil {
+				c.JSON(http.StatusBadRequest, gin.H{"msg": "unable to check relayer role on-chain: " + err.Error()})
+				c.Abort()
+				return
+			}
+			r.roleCache[uint32(req.DestChainID)].Set(addressHex, has, cacheInterval)
+			if !has {
+				c.JSON(http.StatusBadRequest, gin.H{"msg": "Relayer not authorized on-chain"})
+				c.Abort()
+				return
+			}
+		}

This refactoring simplifies the logic by consolidating error handling and reducing the depth of conditional nesting.

---

Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.

Suggested change

	hasRole := r.roleCache[uint32(req.DestChainID)].Get(addressRecovered.Hex())
	if hasRole == nil || hasRole.IsExpired() {
	has, err := bridge.HasRole(ops, relayerRole, addressRecovered)
	if err == nil {
	r.roleCache[uint32(req.DestChainID)].Set(addressRecovered.Hex(), has, cacheInterval)
	}
	if err != nil {
	c.JSON(http.StatusBadRequest, gin.H{"msg": "unable to check relayer role on-chain"})
	c.Abort()
	return
	} else if !has {
	c.JSON(http.StatusBadRequest, gin.H{"msg": "q.Relayer not an on-chain relayer"})
	c.Abort()
	return
	}
	// Simplified role checking logic
	addressHex := addressRecovered.Hex()
	hasRole, found := r.roleCache[uint32(req.DestChainID)].Get(addressHex)
	if !found || hasRole.IsExpired() {
	has, err := bridge.HasRole(ops, relayerRole, addressRecovered)
	if err != nil {
	c.JSON(http.StatusBadRequest, gin.H{"msg": "unable to check relayer role on-chain: " + err.Error()})
	c.Abort()
	return
	}
	r.roleCache[uint32(req.DestChainID)].Set(addressHex, has, cacheInterval)
	if !has {
	c.JSON(http.StatusBadRequest, gin.H{"msg": "Relayer not authorized on-chain"})
	c.Abort()
	return
	}
	}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 79.16667% with 5 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 39.33700%. Comparing base (0661e18) to head (942d683).
Report is 12 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
services/rfq/api/rest/server.go	79.16667%	3 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                 Coverage Diff                 @@
##              master       #2562         +/-   ##
===================================================
+ Coverage   38.84401%   39.33700%   +0.49299%     
===================================================
  Files             91          91                 
  Lines           5571        5641         +70     
  Branches          83          83                 
===================================================
+ Hits            2164        2219         +55     
- Misses          3219        3229         +10     
- Partials         188         193          +5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
stiprelayer	3.33333% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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