v3: Fix issue with default logger when creating RequestCtx

[gaby]

Description

• Use Noop Logger when creating RequestCtx for Adaptor Middleware.
• Added benchmark for No Content.

Fixes #3130

• Enhancement (improvement to existing features and functionality)

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The changes introduce a new disableLogger type that implements a no-operation logging method, which is used to suppress log outputs during request handling in the Fiber framework. This modification is made to prevent undesired logging when the application encounters errors, particularly when serving static content. Additionally, the test suite is updated to include cases for handling requests with no body content, improving the robustness of the tests.

Changes

Files	Change Summary
middleware/adaptor/adaptor.go	Added disableLogger type and Printf method to suppress logging during request context initialization.
middleware/adaptor/adaptor_test.go	Enhanced tests with a new case for requests with no body content and updated benchmarks accordingly.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Expecting the Noop logger to be invoked, leading to no logs being written (#[3130])	✅
Ensure that the logging behavior during request context initialization is controlled (#[3130])	✅

Poem

In the meadow, where bunnies hop,
A logger's silence is quite the stop.
No more logs of files not found,
Just peaceful hops on soft, green ground.
With tests that check both near and far,
Our Fiber app shines like a star! 🌟🐇

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  -- I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  -- Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  -- @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  -- @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  -- @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  -- @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  -- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  -- @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 80.19%. Comparing base (0ef8d71) to head (60e065a).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
middleware/adaptor/adaptor.go	50.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3134      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   80.13%   80.19%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         117      117              
  Lines        9047     9048       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits         7250     7256       +6     
+ Misses       1363     1360       -3     
+ Partials      434      432       -2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	80.19% <50.00%> (+0.05%)	⬆️

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.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5c1a0ce and c879135.

Files selected for processing (2)

• middleware/adaptor/adaptor.go (2 hunks)
• middleware/adaptor/adaptor_test.go (5 hunks)

Additional context used

GitHub Check: codecov/patch

middleware/adaptor/adaptor.go

[warning] 19-19: middleware/adaptor/adaptor.go#L19
Added line #L19 was not covered by tests

Additional comments not posted (3)

middleware/adaptor/adaptor.go (1)

17-20: LGTM!

The disableLogger type with an empty Printf method is a clean way to implement a no-op logger for suppressing unwanted logs. This aligns with the PR objective of preventing logs for missing static files.

Tools

GitHub Check: codecov/patch

[warning] 19-19: middleware/adaptor/adaptor.go#L19
Added line #L19 was not covered by tests

middleware/adaptor/adaptor_test.go (2)

89-89: LGTM!

Initializing the fasthttp.RequestCtx with a disabled logger in the test should help prevent unwanted logging of errors, aligning with the PR objective.

---

415-418: LGTM!

The changes to the benchmark functions to include a new case for handling requests with no body content look good. Creating an empty buffer when bodyContent is nil ensures that the case is handled correctly and prevents potential nil pointer dereferences. This improves the robustness of the benchmarks.

Also applies to: 457-464, 490-493, 531-539

[ReneWerner87]

LGTM

[github-actions]

⚠️ Performance Alert ⚠️

Possible performance regression was detected for benchmark.
Benchmark result of this commit is worse than the previous benchmark result exceeding threshold 1.50.

Benchmark suite	Current: 60e065a	Previous: 0ef8d71	Ratio
BenchmarkAppendMsgitem - MB/s	3220.88 MB/s	1834.64 MB/s	1.76
BenchmarkAppendMsgitem - MB/s	2876.25 MB/s	1834.64 MB/s	1.57

This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.

[ReneWerner87]

BenchmarkAppendMsgitem

@gaby

there is the problem with the same names in different mw´s
can we rename ?

[ReneWerner87]

same for other benches

@gaby should we do it in another PR ? then its separated

[gaby]

BenchmarkAppendMsgitem

@gaby there is the problem with the same names in different mw´s can we rename ?

LOL! 😂 Yeah we should rename that, let do a commit here

[gaby]

Actually those are auto generated

[ReneWerner87]

lets move this discussion to discord