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: Fix queries calls #283

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 20, 2024
Merged

fix: Fix queries calls #283

merged 3 commits into from
Apr 20, 2024

Conversation

whiterabbit1983
Copy link
Contributor

@whiterabbit1983 whiterabbit1983 commented Apr 19, 2024

🚀 This description was created by Ellipsis for commit 4e3ca77

Summary:

This PR refactors query calls, adds ellipsis to base classes, and updates a function to convert certain parameters to string.

Key points:

  • Refactored query calls in summarization.py by removing client.run.
  • Added ellipsis to BaseTask and BaseTaskArgs classes in types.py and worker/types.py.
  • Updated entries_summarization_query in entries_summarization.py to convert new_entry.id and session_id to string.

Generated with ❤️ by ellipsis.dev

Copy link
Contributor

@ellipsis-dev ellipsis-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

❌ Changes requested.

  • Reviewed the entire pull request up to e1275f1
  • Looked at 95 lines of code in 4 files
  • Took 1 minute and 0 seconds to review
More info
  • Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
  • Skipped posting 0 additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of 50%.

Workflow ID: wflow_q7XwLYSXfDNDVvfu


Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. We'll respond in a few minutes. Learn more here.

Copy link
Contributor

@ellipsis-dev ellipsis-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍 Looks good to me!

  • Performed an incremental review on 44ae715
  • Looked at 107 lines of code in 4 files
  • Took 1 minute and 24 seconds to review
More info
  • Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
  • Skipped posting 2 additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of 50%.
1. agents-api/agents_api/activities/summarization.py:156:
  • Assessed confidence : 80%
  • Grade: 0%
  • Comment:
    Please ensure that the get_toplevel_entries_query and entries_summarization_query functions are correctly handling the database operations that were previously handled by client.run.
  • Reasoning:
    The removal of the client.run function calls in summarization.py might cause issues if the functions get_toplevel_entries_query and entries_summarization_query do not return the expected data types or do not perform the necessary operations that client.run was handling. I need to check the implementation of these functions to ensure they are correctly handling the database operations.
2. agents-api/agents_api/models/entry/entries_summarization.py:89:
  • Assessed confidence : 60%
  • Grade: 0%
  • Comment:
    Please ensure that the conversion of new_entry.id and session_id to string does not cause type errors in other parts of the code where these IDs are expected to be UUIDs.
  • Reasoning:
    The conversion of new_entry.id and session_id to string in entries_summarization_query function in entries_summarization.py is a good practice for database operations. However, it's important to ensure that these IDs are not used in any other place in the code where they are expected to be UUIDs. If they are, this could cause type errors.

Workflow ID: wflow_5Sm8IzitcpdXeMJC


Not what you expected? You can customize the content of the reviews using rules. Learn more here.

Copy link
Contributor

@ellipsis-dev ellipsis-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍 Looks good to me!

  • Performed an incremental review on 4e3ca77
  • Looked at 120 lines of code in 5 files
  • Took 1 minute and 40 seconds to review
More info
  • Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
  • Skipped posting 3 additional comments because they didn't meet confidence threshold of 50%.
1. agents-api/agents_api/models/entry/entries_summarization.py:89:
  • Assessed confidence : 50%
  • Comment:
    Please ensure that the conversion of new_entry.id and session_id to string does not cause issues elsewhere in the codebase where UUIDs might be expected.
  • Reasoning:
    The conversion of new_entry.id and session_id to string in entries_summarization_query function in entries_summarization.py is a good practice for ensuring data consistency. However, it's important to ensure that these values are not used in a context where UUIDs are expected elsewhere in the codebase.
2. agents-api/agents_api/activities/types.py:28:
  • Assessed confidence : 50%
  • Comment:
    Please ensure that the BaseTask and BaseTaskArgs classes are not instantiated directly anywhere in the codebase. The addition of ellipsis indicates that these are base classes and might be extended elsewhere.
  • Reasoning:
    The addition of ellipsis to the BaseTask and BaseTaskArgs classes in types.py and worker/types.py files is a good practice for indicating that these are base classes and might be extended elsewhere. However, it's important to ensure that these classes are not instantiated directly anywhere in the codebase.
3. agents-api/agents_api/activities/summarization.py:156:
  • Assessed confidence : 80%
  • Grade: 0%
  • Comment:
    Please ensure that the get_toplevel_entries_query and entries_summarization_query functions return a DataFrame or an object that has the iterrows method. The removal of the client.run function calls might cause issues if this is not the case.
  • Reasoning:
    The removal of the client.run function calls in summarization.py might cause issues if the functions get_toplevel_entries_query and entries_summarization_query do not return a DataFrame or an object that has the iterrows method. I need to check the implementation of these functions to confirm.

Workflow ID: wflow_LXCCqHjxxle4oNOm


Not what you expected? You can customize the content of the reviews using rules. Learn more here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants