Skip to content

Codex agent at work #228

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

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Codex agent at work #228

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

patelraj0602
Copy link
Contributor

PROMPT TO THE AGENT

Document-Store Library PostgreSQL Query Interface Refactoring

CONTEXT & BACKGROUND

You are working with the document-store library, which provides a QueryLayer interface for consuming services. The library has two critical interfaces:

  1. Datastore Interface: @document-store/src/main/java/org/hypertrace/core/documentstore/Datastore.java
    • Has concrete implementations for MongoDB and PostgreSQL
  2. Collection Interface: @document-store/src/main/java/org/hypertrace/core/documentstore/Collection.java
    • Provides CRUD operations APIs for underlying databases

SCOPE: Focus exclusively on the PostgreSQL implementation located at:
@document-store/src/main/java/org/hypertrace/core/documentstore/postgres

Specifically, concentrate on the PostgreSQL implementations of:

  • Datastore interface
  • Collection interface (query API only)

CURRENT PROBLEM
The PostgreSQL implementation of the query interface has a critical limitation:

  • CONSTRAINT: Only supports query building for JSONB type columns and the implementation is jsonb aware
  • LOCATION: Hardcoded outer-column list in @document-store/src/main/java/org/hypertrace/core/documentstore/postgres/utils/PostgresUtils.java
  • IMPACT: Cannot query other column data types

REFACTORING GOALS

Primary Goal (Priority 1):
Extend query generation support to include these data types while maintaining extensible design:

  • String
  • Long
  • Double
  • Boolean
  • TextArray

Secondary Goal (Future Enhancement):
The output parsing already exists in:
@document-store/src/main/java/org/hypertrace/core/documentstore/postgres/PostgresCollection.java:PostgresResultIteratorWithBasicTypes:prepareDocument
Query results should be parsed and returned as JsonNode (acknowledge existing support, will enhance later).

CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION DETAILS

Existing Workaround:
A temporary solution exists in FieldToPgColumnTransformer:transform that handles first-class fields based on:
flatStructureCollection.equals(postgresQueryParser.getTableIdentifier().getTableName())

Recent Interface Additions:
The following interfaces have been created for SQL query generation for first-class fields:

  1. PostgresContainsRelationalFilterParserInterface.java
  2. PostgresInRelationalFilterParserInterface.java
  3. PostgresNotContainsRelationalFilterParser.java
  4. PostgresNotInRelationalFilterParser.java
  5. PostgresRelationalFilterParserFactoryImpl.java

IMPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENTS

Mandatory Constraints:

  1. Registry Pattern: PostgresDatastore:getCollection API must create a registry containing PostgreSQL attribute-to-datatype mappings for query generation. You can interact with the database to create the mappings.
  2. Type-Based Decision Making: Implementation selection must be determined by type lookup from the registry.

The registry-based approach should replace the current hardcoded pattern:

  • Current pattern: flatStructureCollection.equals(context.getTableIdentifier().getTableName()...
  • New pattern: <NewlyCreatedRegistry>:<isFirstClassColumn>

This registry lookup will determine whether to use JSON or non-JSON parser implementations. The decision affects the following parser pairs:

  • PostgresContainsRelationalFilterParser (JSON) vs PostgresContainsRelationalFilterParserNonJsonField (non-JSON)
  • PostgresInRelationalFilterParser (JSON) vs PostgresInRelationalFilterParserNonJsonField (non-JSON)

Additional parser classes that currently handle only JSON-based query generation must have corresponding non-JSON implementations created. Reference implementations for the non-JSON variants are available at:
document-store/src/main/java/org/hypertrace/core/documentstore/postgres/query/v1/parser/filter/nonjson/field/

  1. Extensibility: Design must accommodate future data type additions
  2. Test Compatibility: All changes must pass existing unit tests in @document-store/src/test/java/org/hypertrace/core/documentstore/postgres

Input/Output Specification:

  • INPUT: /Users/rajpatel/Desktop/work/document-store/document-store/src/main/java/org/hypertrace/core/documentstore/query/Query
  • OUTPUT: JSON document via /Users/rajpatel/Desktop/work/document-store/document-store/src/main/java/org/hypertrace/core/documentstore/JSONDocument.java

DELIVERABLES

Please provide:

  1. Architecture Design: Detailed explanation of your refactoring approach
  2. Implementation Plan: Step-by-step breakdown of required changes
  3. Code Changes: All modified/new classes with clear explanations
  4. Registry Implementation: Complete registry design for attribute-to-datatype mappings
  5. Type Resolution Logic: How the system will determine which implementation to use
  6. Extensibility Strategy: How future data types can be easily added

SUCCESS CRITERIA

  • Query generation works for all specified data types (String, Long, Double, Boolean, TextArray) ignore jsonb for now, because it's difficult to build registry mapping for jsonb fields.
  • Registry pattern implemented in PostgresDatastore:getCollection
  • Type-based implementation selection working correctly
  • Able to build the repo and pass existing unit tests pass
  • Design allows easy addition of new data types
  • Code maintains existing input/output contracts

ADDITIONAL NOTES

  • Feel free to add new interfaces and perform necessary refactoring
  • Prioritize clean, maintainable code architecture
  • Consider performance implications of your design choices
  • Document any assumptions or design decisions made during implementation

Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 13, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 67.02703% with 61 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 78.19%. Comparing base (e869f86) to head (20d6116).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
.../postgres/registry/PostgresColumnRegistryImpl.java 76.92% 11 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...core/documentstore/postgres/PostgresDatastore.java 47.36% 10 Missing ⚠️
...entstore/postgres/registry/PostgresColumnInfo.java 33.33% 10 Missing ⚠️
...entstore/postgres/registry/PostgresColumnType.java 54.54% 7 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...ore/documentstore/postgres/PostgresCollection.java 75.00% 3 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...ter/PostgresNotContainsRelationalFilterParser.java 54.54% 2 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...er/filter/PostgresNotInRelationalFilterParser.java 55.55% 2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
.../documentstore/postgres/PostgresQueryExecutor.java 66.66% 2 Missing ⚠️
...ter/PostgresRelationalFilterParserFactoryImpl.java 91.66% 0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...ery/v1/transformer/FieldToPgColumnTransformer.java 88.88% 0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
... and 1 more
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main     #228      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     78.55%   78.19%   -0.37%     
- Complexity     1069     1086      +17     
============================================
  Files           206      210       +4     
  Lines          5228     5383     +155     
  Branches        449      466      +17     
============================================
+ Hits           4107     4209     +102     
- Misses          813      858      +45     
- Partials        308      316       +8     
Flag Coverage Δ
integration 78.19% <67.02%> (-0.37%) ⬇️
unit 55.30% <40.00%> (-0.54%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copy link

Test Results

 40 files  ±0   40 suites  ±0   35s ⏱️ -1s
247 tests ±0  247 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
503 runs  ±0  503 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 20d6116. ± Comparison against base commit e869f86.

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.

1 participant