feat(design, request-logger): logger rate limiter #140
Conversation
BrianLusina
added
enhancement
Algorithm
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughIntroduces a new design pattern called "Request Logger" that implements rate limiting for messages using timestamp-based cooldowns. Includes the pattern documentation, Python implementation with a RequestLogger class, test suite, and a catalog entry. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~12 minutes Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
design_patterns/request_logger/__init__.py (2)
5-9: Consider validating the time_limit parameter and fix comment typo.Two issues:
- Comment typo: Line 7 says "first lookups" but should be "fast lookups (O(1))"
- Missing validation: The constructor doesn't validate that
time_limitis non-negative. A negative time_limit could cause unexpected behavior.🔎 Proposed improvements
class RequestLogger: def __init__(self, time_limit: int): + if time_limit < 0: + raise ValueError("time_limit must be non-negative") self.time_limit = time_limit - # keeps track of the requests as they come in key value pairs, which allows for first lookups (O(1)). + # keeps track of the requests as they come in key value pairs, which allows for fast lookups (O(1)). # the key is the request, the value is the time. self.request_map: Dict[str, int] = {}
12-23: Logic is correct; consider minor refactoring to reduce duplication.The rate limiting logic correctly implements the algorithm described in the README. However, there's code duplication on lines 19 and 22 where
self.request_map[formatted_message] = timestampandreturn Trueappear twice.🔎 Optional refactor to reduce duplication
def message_request_decision(self, timestamp: int, request: str) -> bool: formatted_message = request.lower() if formatted_message in self.request_map: latest_time_for_message = self.request_map[formatted_message] difference = timestamp - latest_time_for_message if difference < self.time_limit: return False - self.request_map[formatted_message] = timestamp - return True self.request_map[formatted_message] = timestamp return Truedesign_patterns/request_logger/test_request_logger.py (1)
6-23: Test cases are well-designed; consider adding edge case for exact time_limit boundary.The existing test cases comprehensively cover the main scenarios. However, consider adding a test case where the timestamp difference equals exactly the time_limit to verify the boundary condition.
🔎 Suggested additional test case
# Add to REQUEST_LOGGER_TEST_CASES (7, [(1, "Hello", True), (8, "Hello", True)]), # difference = 7, exactly at boundaryThis would test the edge case where
difference == time_limit, which should returnTrue(accept) based on the implementation's< time_limitcheck.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (8)
design_patterns/request_logger/images/examples/request_logger_example_1.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngdesign_patterns/request_logger/images/examples/request_logger_example_2.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngdesign_patterns/request_logger/images/examples/request_logger_example_3.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngdesign_patterns/request_logger/images/solutions/request_logger_solution_1.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngdesign_patterns/request_logger/images/solutions/request_logger_solution_2.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngdesign_patterns/request_logger/images/solutions/request_logger_solution_3.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngdesign_patterns/request_logger/images/solutions/request_logger_solution_4.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngdesign_patterns/request_logger/images/solutions/request_logger_solution_5.pngis excluded by!**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
DIRECTORY.mddesign_patterns/request_logger/README.mddesign_patterns/request_logger/__init__.pydesign_patterns/request_logger/test_request_logger.py
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code graph analysis (1)
design_patterns/request_logger/test_request_logger.py (1)
design_patterns/request_logger/__init__.py (2)
RequestLogger(4-23)message_request_decision(12-23)
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.18.1)
DIRECTORY.md
517-517: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 0; Actual: 2
(MD007, ul-indent)
518-518: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
DIRECTORY.md (1)
517-518: LGTM! Catalog entry follows existing conventions.The new "Request Logger" entry is properly placed within the Pubsub > Simple Events section and follows the same indentation pattern as surrounding entries. The static analysis indentation warnings can be safely ignored as they don't account for the file's established conventions.
design_patterns/request_logger/test_request_logger.py (1)
26-39: LGTM! Well-structured parameterized tests.The test implementation is clean and effective:
- Proper use of parameterized testing to reduce duplication
- Clear assertion messages that include timestamp and request for debugging
- Type hints enhance readability and catch potential issues
design_patterns/request_logger/README.md (1)
19-21: All referenced image files exist. The 3 example images and 5 solution images are present in the repository, so the documentation links are valid.
Describe your change:
Has a design for a request logger rate limiter
Checklist:
Fixes: #{$ISSUE_NO}.Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Documentation
Tests
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.