feat: update DataStore observe / observeQuery to return all fields in local update snapshot (#9556)

[david-mcafee]

feat: update DataStore observe to return all fields in local update snapshot (#9556)

Description of changes

Issue #, if available

#9556

Description of how you validated changes

Manual testing with a sample app, running unit tests.

Checklist

• PR description included
• yarn test passes
• Tests are changed or added
• [N/A] Relevant documentation is changed or added (and PR referenced)

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #9617 (2af4e9d) into main (9831d3d) will increase coverage by 0.41%.
The diff coverage is 88.15%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #9617      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   78.34%   78.76%   +0.41%     
==========================================
  Files         250      250              
  Lines       18339    18354      +15     
  Branches     3955     3963       +8     
==========================================
+ Hits        14368    14456      +88     
+ Misses       3840     3767      -73     
  Partials      131      131              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
packages/datastore/src/types.ts	80.79% <ø> (ø)
...pubsub/src/Providers/AWSAppSyncRealTimeProvider.ts	19.83% <33.33%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
packages/datastore/src/sync/processors/mutation.ts	67.33% <90.90%> (+1.36%)	⬆️
packages/api-graphql/src/types/index.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/auth/src/types/Auth.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/core/src/Platform/version.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/core/src/Util/Retry.ts	94.59% <100.00%> (+0.15%)	⬆️
packages/datastore/src/datastore/datastore.ts	79.76% <100.00%> (+6.75%)	⬆️
packages/datastore/src/storage/storage.ts	94.11% <100.00%> (+10.58%)	⬆️
...ackages/pubsub/src/Providers/AWSAppSyncProvider.ts	68.13% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 8 more

📣 Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more

[iartemiev]

Looks good! Just a minor req'd change

[svidgen]

Can we add testing for this?

[cshfang]

Small nit and a small question that I think was answered offline. Just wanted to make sure we double check it real quick but otherwise lgtm!

[david-mcafee]

Can we add testing for this?

@svidgen - sure!

[manueliglesias]

LGTM 👍

Edit:
I need to re-review this as it might be having unintended effects in the fields sent to the mutation input

[david-mcafee]

LGTM 👍

Edit: I need to re-review this as it might be having unintended effects in the fields sent to the mutation input

@manueliglesias this shouldn't affect that, as the updates are only being returned to the customer, but the mutation event sent to AppSync will only send updated fields

[manueliglesias]

LGTM 👍

Edit: I need to re-review this as it might be having unintended effects in the fields sent to the mutation input

@manueliglesias this shouldn't affect that, as the updates are only being returned to the customer, but the mutation event sent to AppSync will only send updated fields

Awesome! Thank you for confirming @david-mcafee 😄

[manueliglesias]

It works great! The only thing I'd like to see changed is creating two types instead of adding an optional field to the existing type. That way we don't leak that implementation detail.

[cshfang]

This lgtm. Thanks for working on this

[cshfang]

Nit: Doesn't seem like this is the case but if tests ever did need to update the mocks for these implementations, it seems more idiomatic to use jest.fn().

[manueliglesias]

LGTM!! 👍

[iartemiev]

LGTM 👍🏻

[david-mcafee]

Confirmed with @svidgen offline that it's alright to merge this.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically locked since there hasn't been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

Looking for a help forum? We recommend joining the Amplify Community Discord server amplify-help forum.