-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33
Remove report_id from measurement submission #1195
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
Open
LDiazN
wants to merge
22
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
remove-report-id
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
22 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
e38bc1a
remove report id from legacy measurement sumission function
LDiazN 393d254
Remove report_id from anonymous credentials submit
LDiazN c804c84
Disaggregate bad measurements count by type of error
LDiazN 77a5ecf
disaggregate type of error in anonc submission path
LDiazN dff6de5
Refactor metadata checking in submission
LDiazN 69a1628
Remove open report from anonc tests
LDiazN dc5ee4e
simplify typing
LDiazN 198bb1e
Improve docstring
LDiazN 5374c5c
remove unused function
LDiazN 90d52f3
remove unused imports
LDiazN eea7d17
Set report_id in measurement submission path and add test for checkin…
LDiazN a973560
Add check to verify that submit_measurement always sets the report_id
LDiazN 0582837
Add report_id to the content key instead of root of json
LDiazN 2e9739d
Refactor validation into check function
LDiazN 1843154
Add report_id to submission result
LDiazN 22bc4f4
Move reformating to function constructing msm uid
LDiazN b383f67
Restore report_id parsing; add consistency check between report_id an…
LDiazN 45e46d9
Update tests
LDiazN acbf2ba
Add tests to check metadata consistency against report_id
LDiazN 72c2b81
Remove outdated comment
LDiazN 41d6bff
Remove uneccesary identation
LDiazN 8d7dba6
Improve test name and docs
LDiazN File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we need to return to the caller the
report_idthat was generated as well? I suppose it doesn't hurt since it's a value which we generated in here and the client has no other way of knowing it.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the
report_idis redundant to themeasurement_uidin this context (it's unique per measurement). The best value we could get out of it is restoring it in the future, but in that case the probe would probably already know it before sending the measurementBut I agree it wouldn't hurt to have add it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes I agree that it's redundant. We should check though with @aanorbel and @sdsantos if this is though still required by the mobile apps for something (I seem to recall this was still being stored in the in-app DB).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Norbel suggested that we keep the
report_idin the response model, so I added that 👍