Conversation
- blockedIpCache에 putIfAbsent, computeIfPresent 적용으로 경합 상황에서의 중복 차단 방지 - compute를 사용해 BlockedIpHistory를 원자적으로 업데이트하도록 변경 - 초기 차단 상태(LEVEL_0) 지속 시간을 0초에서 10초로 변경하여 안정성 확보
MOSU-258 refactor: IP 차단 요청시 발생할 수 있는 동시성 경합 상황 테스트 및 코드 개선
MOSU-264 refactor: Dirty Checking을 위한 Transaction 분리
|
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the You can disable this status message by setting the ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @wlgns12370, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request is a deployment merge, integrating all changes up to issue #265 into the main branch. The primary focus of this deployment includes updates to Kakao's Terms of Service handling and significant improvements to the IP rate limiting mechanism. Additionally, a new database initialization script has been introduced.
Highlights
- Enhanced Kakao OAuth Integration: I've updated the Kakao OAuth integration to handle multiple service terms, specifically terms_01, terms_02, and terms_03. A new OAuthUserPersistenceProcessor was introduced to centralize the logic for creating or updating user profiles based on OAuth information, including the marketing agreement status.
- Robust IP Rate Limiting: I've refactored the IP rate limiting filter for improved concurrency and accuracy. This includes using AtomicInteger for thread-safe request counting, refining the cache expiry logic for blocked IPs, and adjusting the initial penalty duration for LEVEL_0 to 10 seconds. The blocking mechanism is now more resilient under high concurrency.
- Initial Database Schema Setup: I've added a comprehensive V1__init.sql script to establish the foundational database schema. This script defines numerous tables essential for the application's functionality, such as application, exam, user, payment, and profile related entities.
- Build and Test Infrastructure Updates: I've reorganized Lombok dependencies in build.gradle for clarity and removed some testcontainers dependencies. New dedicated test classes (OAuthUserServiceTest and IpRateLimitingFilterMultiUserIsolationTest) have been added to ensure the correctness and robustness of the updated OAuth and IP rate limiting features, especially under concurrent scenarios.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments or fill out our survey to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces significant features and refactorings, including Kakao OAuth integration enhancements and a robust, thread-safe IP rate-limiting filter. The changes are generally of high quality, with good use of modern Java features for concurrency and improved modularity by extracting user persistence logic. The addition of comprehensive tests for the IP filter is particularly commendable.
My review focuses on a critical null-safety issue in the new OAuth persistence logic that could break the login flow, a minor logging improvement, and a suggestion to improve test maintainability. Overall, the changes are very positive, and after addressing the identified issues, the code will be in a great state for deployment.
| public UserJpaEntity process(final OAuthUserInfo info) { | ||
| return userRepository.findByLoginId(info.email()) | ||
| .map(existingUser -> { | ||
| existingUser.updateOAuthUser( | ||
| info.gender(), | ||
| info.name(), | ||
| info.phoneNumber(), | ||
| info.birthDay(), | ||
| info.marketingAgreed()); | ||
| return existingUser; | ||
| }) | ||
| .orElseGet(() -> { | ||
| final UserJpaEntity newUser = UserJpaEntity.builder() | ||
| .loginId(info.email()) | ||
| .gender(info.gender()) | ||
| .name(info.name()) | ||
| .birth(info.birthDay()) | ||
| .phoneNumber(info.phoneNumber()) | ||
| .userRole(UserRole.ROLE_PENDING) | ||
| .provider(AuthProvider.KAKAO) | ||
| .agreedToTermsOfService(true) | ||
| .agreedToPrivacyPolicy(true) | ||
| .agreedToMarketing(info.marketingAgreed()) | ||
| .build(); | ||
| return userRepository.save(newUser); | ||
| }); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The process method doesn't handle the case where info.email() is null. If the OAuth provider doesn't return an email, userRepository.findByLoginId(null) will be called, which will likely cause a NullPointerException or an IllegalArgumentException, breaking the login/signup flow for that user.
The previous implementation had a fallback for a null email, but it was flawed as it used a non-unique value ("NA"). This refactoring seems to have lost the null-safety check entirely.
If an email is required for identifying users, you should validate that it's not null and throw an exception if it is. This makes the requirement explicit and prevents runtime errors.
public UserJpaEntity process(final OAuthUserInfo info) {
if (info.email() == null) {
// If email is not guaranteed to be provided, consider using another unique identifier from the provider.
// Throwing an exception makes the requirement for an email explicit.
throw new life.mosu.mosuserver.global.exception.CustomRuntimeException(life.mosu.mosuserver.global.exception.ErrorCode.INSUFFICIENT_KAKAO_USER_DATA, "Email is required from Kakao for login.");
}
return userRepository.findByLoginId(info.email())
.map(existingUser -> {
existingUser.updateOAuthUser(
info.gender(),
info.name(),
info.phoneNumber(),
info.birthDay(),
info.marketingAgreed());
return existingUser;
})
.orElseGet(() -> {
final UserJpaEntity newUser = UserJpaEntity.builder()
.loginId(info.email())
.gender(info.gender())
.name(info.name())
.birth(info.birthDay())
.phoneNumber(info.phoneNumber())
.userRole(UserRole.ROLE_PENDING)
.provider(AuthProvider.KAKAO)
.agreedToTermsOfService(true)
.agreedToPrivacyPolicy(true)
.agreedToMarketing(info.marketingAgreed())
.build();
return userRepository.save(newUser);
});
}| .orElse(false); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| log.info("동의 여부{}", agreedToMarketing); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This log statement uses log.info. For a deployment build, logging marketing consent for every OAuth login at the INFO level could create a lot of noise in the production logs. It would be more appropriate to use log.debug for this kind of information.
Additionally, the log message 동의 여부{} is missing a separator before the placeholder, which can make it harder to read. Consider changing it to 마케팅 동의 여부: {} for better clarity and descriptiveness.
| log.info("동의 여부{}", agreedToMarketing); | |
| log.debug("마케팅 동의 여부: {}", agreedToMarketing); |
| @Test | ||
| @DisplayName("Service Terms 응답에 마케팅 동의(terms_03)가 없는 경우 false로 파싱한다") | ||
| void 마케팅_동의_여부를_파싱한다() { | ||
| Map<String, Object> term1 = Map.of( | ||
| "tag", "terms_02", | ||
| "required", true, | ||
| "agreed", true | ||
| ); | ||
| Map<String, Object> term2 = Map.of( | ||
| "tag", "terms_01", | ||
| "required", true, | ||
| "agreed", true | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| Map<String, Object> serviceTermsAttributes = new HashMap<>(); | ||
| serviceTermsAttributes.put("id", 4342056184L); | ||
| serviceTermsAttributes.put("service_terms", List.of(term1, term2)); | ||
|
|
||
| boolean agreedToMarketing = false; | ||
| if (serviceTermsAttributes.get("service_terms") instanceof List<?> termsList) { | ||
| agreedToMarketing = termsList.stream() | ||
| .filter(term -> term instanceof Map) | ||
| .map(term -> (Map<String, Object>) term) | ||
| .filter(termMap -> "terms_03".equals(termMap.get("tag"))) | ||
| .findFirst() | ||
| .map(termMap -> (Boolean) termMap.get("agreed")) | ||
| .orElse(false); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| Assertions.assertFalse(agreedToMarketing); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test duplicates the implementation logic from OAuthUserService to test it. While this works, it makes the test brittle and hard to maintain. If the implementation in OAuthUserService changes, this test will not fail but will need to be updated manually, which can lead to tests becoming out of sync with the actual code.
A better approach would be to either:
- Extract the parsing logic into a separate, public static utility method and test that method directly.
- Test the
OAuthUserService.loadUsermethod itself by mocking its dependencies (super.loadUser,webClient, etc.).
This would make the test more robust and less coupled to the implementation details.
2 participants
📝 내용
#265까지의 작업 내역을 main 브랜치에 병합하여 배포합니다.
주요 변경점
관련 이슈