[PM-16812] Shortcut duplicate group patch requests #5354
+1,437
−250
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
…duplicate-group-patch-requests
…duplicate-group-patch-requests
LaunchDarkly flag references🔍 1 flag added or modified
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #5354 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 44.30% 44.38% +0.08%
==========================================
Files 1497 1498 +1
Lines 69212 69360 +148
Branches 6241 6260 +19
==========================================
+ Hits 30665 30788 +123
- Misses 37224 37243 +19
- Partials 1323 1329 +6 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
New Issues (13)Checkmarx found the following issues in this Pull Request
Fixed Issues (16)Great job! The following issues were fixed in this Pull Request
|
…duplicate-group-patch-requests
eliykat
commented
Feb 5, 2025
Comment on lines
+134
to
+147
| private async Task AddMembersAsync(Group group, HashSet<Guid> usersToAdd) | ||
| { | ||
| // Azure Entra ID is known to send redundant "add" requests for each existing member every time any member | ||
| // is removed. To avoid excessive load on the database, we check against the high availability replica and | ||
| // return early if they already exist. | ||
| var groupMembers = await _groupRepository.GetManyUserIdsByIdAsync(group.Id, useReadOnlyReplica: true); | ||
| if (usersToAdd.IsSubsetOf(groupMembers)) | ||
| { | ||
| _logger.LogDebug("Ignoring duplicate SCIM request to add members {Members} to group {Group}", usersToAdd, group.Id); | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| await _groupRepository.AddGroupUsersByIdAsync(group.Id, usersToAdd); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The interesting part of the new command.
rkac-bw
reviewed
Feb 5, 2025
|
Database tests are failing but for an unrelated sproc. Investigating it with the team. PR can still be reviewed in the meantime. |
jrmccannon
previously approved these changes
Feb 7, 2025
…duplicate-group-patch-requests
|
Resolved conflicts - the only conflict was around the feature flag definitions in |
|
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.
🎟️ Tracking
https://bitwarden.atlassian.net/browse/PM-16812
📔 Objective
Solve 3 issues with our current SCIM PATCH group handling:
While I was here, I refactored the Group Patch command to use a flat switch statement (rather than the various nested if / else ifs), and extracted constants to a separate file. This is implemented (along with the main changes) as a vNext version of the command behind a feature flag.
Testing is covered by:
SubstituteServicemethod wasn't working properly otherwise.📸 Screenshots
⏰ Reminders before review
🦮 Reviewer guidelines
:+1:) or similar for great changes:memo:) or ℹ️ (:information_source:) for notes or general info:question:) for questions:thinking:) or 💭 (:thought_balloon:) for more open inquiry that's not quite a confirmed issue and could potentially benefit from discussion:art:) for suggestions / improvements:x:) or:warning:) for more significant problems or concerns needing attention:seedling:) or ♻️ (:recycle:) for future improvements or indications of technical debt:pick:) for minor or nitpick changes