Chainmail: implement save/unsave message #855 #856
Conversation
…table definition out of the service mod
…ST handler rework for msg retrieval by id
cool-ant
changed the base branch from
mm/chainmail-implement-archive
to
main
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some of this doesn't belong in the mdbook, but instead belongs in a github issue.
In general, the doc updates should be split out from this chainmail save/unsave message implementation, lest you hold up the chainmail update for a much longer time than necessary. In fact, I'd recommend you split the doc updates themselves into many/multiple individual PRs so they can be independently reviewed on where the new docs get inserted and their content
| params | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn get_where_clause_from_sender_receiver_params(params: HashMap<String, String>) -> Option<String> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You don't need "from_sender_receiver_params" in the function name, because it would already read get_where_clause(params) so it's clear it's from the params
| let mq: HttpRequest; | ||
| // handle id param requests (for specific message) | ||
| if params.contains_key("id") { | ||
| where_clause = format!("WHERE CONCAT(receiver, rowid) = {}", params.get("id")?); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this ID actually fixed? If the event database is pruned, then the email this refers to would probably shift. Probably better to just add an auto-incrementing ID field for each email.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
rowid is the event id, which is stable.
| Transact::add_action_to_transaction( | ||
| "save", | ||
| &chainmail::action_structs::save { | ||
| receiver: msg.receiver, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you're saving a sent message, then it makes sense to save the receiver. If you're saving a received message, then it makes sense to save the sender. So you probably want to always save both sender + receiver.
| archive: func(event-id: u64) -> result<_, error>; | ||
|
|
||
| // Save an email | ||
| save: func(event-id: u64) -> result<_, error>; |
| fn get_primary_key(&self) -> Self::PrimaryKey { | ||
| self.event_id | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this because you can't use #[primary_key] when the struct is split into a separate module?
| #[event(history)] | ||
| pub fn sent(sender: AccountNumber, receiver: AccountNumber, subject: String, body: String) {} | ||
| #[event(history)] | ||
| pub fn archive(event_id: String) {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you add an email id field, you can make this archive(account: AccountNumber, email_id: u64)
No description provided.