Skip to content

fix misleading error message #239

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 22, 2025
Merged

fix misleading error message #239

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 22, 2025

Conversation

@iuwqyir
Copy link
Contributor

@iuwqyir iuwqyir commented Jul 22, 2025 •
edited by coderabbitai bot
Loading

TL;DR

Improved committer logic for handling edge cases when determining blocks to commit.

What changed?

  • Changed a log level from Info to Debug for the message about the max block number found in main storage
  • Enhanced the block count validation logic:
    • Split the negative block count check into two separate conditions
    • Added explicit handling for when block count is exactly zero, returning an empty array instead of an error

How to test?

  1. Run the orchestrator with a chain that has no new blocks to commit
  2. Verify that the system gracefully handles the zero block case without errors
  3. Check logs to confirm the max block number message appears only in debug level

Why make this change?

The previous implementation treated zero blocks to commit as an error condition, which isn't actually an error state but a valid scenario where the system is already up to date. This change improves the robustness of the committer by properly distinguishing between error conditions (negative block count) and valid no-op conditions (zero block count).

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes
    • Improved handling of scenarios with zero blocks to commit, preventing unnecessary errors and ensuring smoother operation.
    • Adjusted logging to reduce noise by reporting certain information at the debug level instead of info.

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 22, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Walkthrough

The changes adjust logging verbosity for reporting the maximum block number in storage, switching from Info to Debug level. Additionally, the logic for determining the number of blocks to commit is refined: negative block counts now trigger errors, while zero block counts are handled gracefully by returning an empty slice without error.

Changes

File Change Summary
internal/orchestrator/committer.go Changed log level from Info to Debug for max block number reporting; refined block count error and handling logic.

Estimated code review effort

1 (~3 minutes)

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 627b36c and 0f2ad67.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • internal/orchestrator/committer.go (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
internal/orchestrator/committer.go (2)

116-116: LGTM: Appropriate log level adjustment.

Changing from Info to Debug level for the max block number message reduces log verbosity during normal operation while preserving the information for debugging purposes.

138-143: LGTM: Improved edge case handling with clearer logic separation.

The refactored block count validation correctly distinguishes between error conditions (negative count indicating possible chain reset) and valid no-operation scenarios (zero count when system is up-to-date). This eliminates misleading error messages for the zero block case while preserving proper error handling for genuine issues.

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings
🪧 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.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • 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 explain this code block.
    • @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 explain its main purpose.
    • @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.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this 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.

@iuwqyir Graphite App
Copy link
Contributor Author

iuwqyir commented Jul 22, 2025

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@iuwqyir iuwqyir marked this pull request as ready for review July 22, 2025 18:18
@iuwqyir iuwqyir merged commit 513dd51 into main Jul 22, 2025
6 checks passed
@iuwqyir iuwqyir deleted the 07-22-fix_misleading_error_message branch July 22, 2025 18:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@iuwqyir