Validate block database save/export operations with DataBlockResponse model
#1311
Conversation
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
datalab
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project |
datalab
|
| Branch Review |
ml-evs/improve-block-test
|
| Run status |
|
| Run duration | 08m 01s |
| Commit |
|
| Committer | Matthew Evans |
| View all properties for this run ↗︎ | |
| Test results | |
|---|---|
Failures
|
0
|
Flaky
|
0
|
Pending
|
0
|
Skipped
|
0
|
Passing
|
336
|
| View all changes introduced in this branch ↗︎ | |
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/improve-block-test
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d9f3b67 to
55683e4
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1311 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 78.90% 79.82% +0.91%
==========================================
Files 68 69 +1
Lines 4679 4674 -5
==========================================
+ Hits 3692 3731 +39
+ Misses 987 943 -44
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/improve-block-test
branch
from
55683e4 to
399ae9d
Compare
ml-evs
changed the title
DataBlockResponse model
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/improve-block-test
branch
2 times, most recently
from
7c77647 to
8fd6785
Compare
jdbocarsly
reviewed
Aug 13, 2025
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/improve-block-test
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b7a8008 to
2d68baf
Compare
|
This is the first of several scary technical debt resolving PRs, with this one changing how we save block data -- I've tried to test the current behaviour extensively so that we know when we are breaking it, but will need several follow-ups to refine it. Next up, trying to get pydantic v2 in... this PR started as an off-shoot for that to just robustify some of the tests! |
ml-evs
added
API
|
As our premier chat block user @jdbocarsly, I wonder if you just want to try out the refactored chat block locally after I merge this? I've significantly refactored it and added a lot of extra validation, plus a testing mode that uses Langchain's |
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/improve-block-test
branch
2 times, most recently
from
23a0ffe to
ee9278c
Compare
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/improve-block-test
branch
7 times, most recently
from
ed4cc63 to
10b4953
Compare
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/improve-block-test
branch
from
10b4953 to
3500700
Compare
- Do not mutate block state when saving to db - Make sure block db update happens twice: once after receiving partial UI state, and once after block run
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/improve-block-test
branch
from
3500700 to
8f0bb79
Compare
- Nest XRD peak data under processed_data key - Add some verbose tests for block life cycle - Add metadata to block model - Remove defunct code for from_db, dereference_files and load_blocks - Strip potentially heavy ignored keys out of item save from app and API - Add metadata field for blocks - Use strings for file ID keys in nested block fields - Reintroduce uv-vis test - Fix issue where bokeh plot disappears after save
ml-evs
force-pushed
the
ml-evs/improve-block-test
branch
from
8f0bb79 to
c714e70
Compare
This was referenced Aug 22, 2025
This was referenced Sep 24, 2025
Closed
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
This PR initially just updated the "all blocks" test to separate out each block and make sure that they were all doing something sensible. However, I realised that without the app to pass block data back in
update-blockcalls, some of the block results was not being saved in the database. This PR fixes that by explicitly calling_save_to_dbafter every block creation call, making thesave_to_dboption somewhat defunct.Following the principle of least suprise, I think the previous undocumented behaviour (i.e., being able to essentially see a block in an unsaved state) was not expected, so the only side effect here should be improved persistence.
In order to properly implement this, block operations now go through the new
DataBlockResponsemodel introduced in #1310, which we can refine over time. I've refactored the NMR, XRD and ChatBlock to extend and use this model directly. No other blocks should be affected, as of yet, as the model still allows extra keys to be passed through transparently. A future PR will have to try restrict this and refactor all blocks to store data in the correct places whilst maintaining backwards compat.