feat(orchestration,core-flows,medusa,product,types,utils): product import/export uses workflows #5811
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: ec7f1c5 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 3 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 3 Ignored Deployments
|
packages/medusa/src/utils/queries/products/get-variants-from-price-list.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
integration-tests/plugins/__tests__/product/admin/import-products.spec.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
riqwan
changed the title
riqwan
changed the title
|
@riqwan feel free to merge as you please :) |
| for (const [ | ||
| product_id, | ||
| variantsUpdateData = [], | ||
| ] of productVariantsMap.entries()) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: entries is not required, a map is iterable and will return the entries
packages/core-flows/src/handlers/product/update-product-variants.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| @@ -37,6 +36,7 @@ export default class ProductExportStrategy extends AbstractBatchJobStrategy { | |||
| protected readonly productService_: ProductService | |||
| protected readonly fileService_: IFileService | |||
| protected readonly featureFlagRouter_: FlagRouter | |||
| protected readonly remoteQuery_: any | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: We have a type for the remoteQuery if I am correct
There was a problem hiding this comment.
will address this in a follow up PR, saw this too late.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@riqwan have you done the followup pr?
| ;[productList, count] = await this.productService_ | ||
| .withTransaction(transactionManager) | ||
| .listAndCount(filterable_fields, { | ||
| ...(list_config ?? {}), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: since listConfig has a default value being {}. we can remove ?? {} right?
| filterable_fields, | ||
| { | ||
| ...list_config, | ||
| take: null, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: why don't we use the take here? the issue is that we are fetching everything here
| { | ||
| ...list_config, | ||
| skip: offset, | ||
| take: Math.min(productCount - offset, limit), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: move that to a const above to be used in both cases
| @@ -565,6 +616,10 @@ class ProductImportStrategy extends AbstractBatchJobStrategy { | |||
| return | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| const isMedusaV2Enabled = this.featureFlagRouter_.isFeatureEnabled( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: should we move that on the class level to be accessible everywhere? like a getter for example
| await this.productVariantService_ | ||
| .withTransaction(transactionManager) | ||
| .create(product!, variant as unknown as CreateProductVariantInput) | ||
| if (isMedusaV2Enabled) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: In general, the workflows accept a collection of element, we should use that batch approach in a follow up pr. cc @olivermrbl @carlos-r-l-rodrigues
|
|
||
| export function createContainerLike(obj): ContainerLike { | ||
| return { | ||
| resolve(key: string) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
todo: resolve<T = unknown>(key: string): T
No description provided.