Fixes https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/issues/13577.
When naming or renaming an object, we are already checking that the name
was available compared to other existing objects.
But we also need to check that the relation fields that will be created
or updated are available as well: we create relation fields on
Attachment, Note, Favorite, Task and TimelineActivites, that bear the
name of the object. Thus, it is not possible to create an object that
has the same name as one of the fields on Attachment, Note etc: name,
createdAt, ... are not valid names.
# Introduction
Following https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/13420
What has been done:
- `CreateFieldInput` transpilation to `FlatFieldMetadata`
- `FlatFieldMetadata` validator service
- A lof of transpilation utils from `input` to `flatObject` or
`flatField`
- Created dedicated v2 api metadata services
- Introducing `inferDeletionFromMissingObjectFieldIndex` in the builder,
to avoid diffing every object and field of the current workspace we
allow only generating create/update migration operations, usefull when
passing by the api metadata
## We still need to in another PR:
- Implement a strong unit test coverage and critical functions and
services
- Finalize flat field metadata validation exception for `options`
`defaultValue` `settings` and `relations`
- Finalize `flatObjectMetadata` validation and v2 service refactor
- Plug the new service when feature flag is enabled
Currently, when a server query or mutation from the front-end fails, the
error message defined server-side is displayed in a snackbar in the
front-end.
These error messages usually contain technical details that don't belong
to the user interface, such as "ObjectMetadataCollection not found" or
"invalid ENUM value for ...".
**BE**
In addition to the original error message that is still needed (for the
request response, debugging, sentry monitoring etc.), we add a
`displayedErrorMessage` that will be used in the snackbars. It's only
relevant to add it for the messages that will reach the FE (ie. not in
jobs or in rest api for instance) and if it can help the user sort out /
fix things (ie. we do add displayedErrorMessage for "Cannot create
multiple draft versions for the same workflow" or "Cannot delete
[field], please update the label identifier field first", but not
"Object metadata does not exist"), even if in practice in the FE users
should not be able to perform an action that will not work (ie should
not be able to save creation of multiple draft versions of the same
workflows).
**FE**
To ease the usage we replaced enqueueSnackBar with enqueueErrorSnackBar
and enqueueSuccessSnackBar with an api that only requires to pass on the
error.
If no displayedErrorMessage is specified then the default error message
is `An error occured.`
In this PR:
## Improve recompute metadata cache performance. We are aiming for
~100ms
Deleting relationMetadata table and FKs pointing on it
Fetching indexMetadata and indexFieldMetadata in a separate query as
typeorm is suboptimizing
## Remove caching lock
As recomputing the metadata cache is lighter, we try to stop preventing
multiple concurrent computations. This also simplifies interfaces
## Introduce self recovery mecanisms to recompute cache automatically if
corrupted
Aka getFreshObjectMetadataMaps
## custom object resolver performance improvement: 1sec to 200ms
Double check queries and indexes used while creating a custom object
Remove the queries to db to use the cached objectMetadataMap
## reduce objectMetadataMaps to 500kb
<img width="222" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/2370dc80-49b6-4b63-8d5e-30c5ebdaa062"
/>
We used to stored 3 fieldMetadataMaps (byId, byName, byJoinColumnName).
While this is great for devXP, this is not great for performances.
Using the same mecanisme as for objectMetadataMap: we only keep byIdMap
and introduce two otherMaps to idByName, idByJoinColumnName to make the
bridge
## Add dataloader on IndexMetadata (aka indexMetadataList in the API)
## Improve field resolver performances too
## Deprecate ClientConfig
This PR attemps at improving sentry grouping and filtering by
- Using the exceptionCode as the fingerprint when the error is a
customException. For this to work in this PR we are now throwing
customExceptions instead of internalServerError deprived of their code.
They will still be converted to Internal server errors when sent back as
response
- Filtering 4xx issues where it was missing (for emailVerification
because errors were not handled, for invalid captcha and billing errors
because they are httpErrors and not graphqlErrors)
---------
Co-authored-by: Félix Malfait <felix@twenty.com>
# Introduction
This PR contains several SNAPSHOT files explaining big +
While refactoring the Object Model settings page in
https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/10653, encountered a critical
issue when submitting either one or both names with `""` empty string
hard corrupting a workspace.
This motivate this PR reviewing server side validation
I feel like we could share zod schema between front and back
## Refactored server validation
What to expect from Names:
- Plural and singular have to be different ( case insensitive and
trimmed check )
- Contains only a-z A-Z and 0-9
- Follows camelCase
- Is not empty => Is not too short ( 1 )
- Is not too long ( 63 )
- Is case insensitive( fooBar and fOoBar now rejected )
What to expect from Labels:
- Plural and singular have to be different ( case insensitive and
trimmed check )
- Is not empty => Is not too short ( 1 )
- Is not too long ( 63 )
- Is case insensitive ( fooBar and fOoBar now rejected )
close https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/issues/10694
## Creation integrations tests
Created new integrations tests, following
[EachTesting](https://jestjs.io/docs/api#testeachtablename-fn-timeout)
pattern and uses snapshot to assert errors message. These tests cover
several failing use cases and started to implement ones for the happy
path but object metadata item deletion is currently broken unless I'm
mistaken @Weiko is on it
## Notes
- [ ] As we've added new validation rules towards names and labels we
should scan db in order to standardize existing values using either a
migration command or manual check
- [ ] Will review in an other PR the update path, adding integrations
tests and so on
In this PR:
1. Refactor guards to avoid duplicated queries: WorkspaceAuthGuard and
UserAuthGuard only check for existence of workspace and user in the
request without querying the database
At field creation we are checking the availability of the name by
comparing it to the other fields' names' on the object; but for
composite fields the fields' names' as indicated in the repository do
not exactly match the column names' on the tables (e.g "createdBy" field
is actually represented by columns createdByName, createdBySource etc.).
In this PR we prevent the conflict with the standard composite fields'
names.
There is still room for errors with the custom composite fields: for
example a custom composite field "address" of type address on a custom
object "listing" will introduce the columns addressAddressStreet1,
addressAddressStreet2 etc. while we won't prevent the user from later
creating a custom field named "addressAddressStreet1".
For now I decided not to tackle this as this seem extremely edgy + would
impact performance on creation of all fields while never actually useful
(I think).
Marie