Communication: Add answer posts content to course wide search

[cremertim]

Checklist

General

• I tested all changes and their related features with all corresponding user types on a test server.
• This is a small issue that I tested locally and was confirmed by another developer on a test server.
• Language: I followed the guidelines for inclusive, diversity-sensitive, and appreciative language.
• I chose a title conforming to the naming conventions for pull requests.

Server

• Important: I implemented the changes with a very good performance and prevented too many (unnecessary) and too complex database calls.
• I strictly followed the principle of data economy for all database calls.
• I strictly followed the server coding and design guidelines.
• I added multiple integration tests (Spring) related to the features (with a high test coverage).
• I added pre-authorization annotations according to the guidelines and checked the course groups for all new REST Calls (security).
• I documented the Java code using JavaDoc style.

Motivation and Context

Currently, the search only filters the content of the original posts

Description

I added answer posts, where the original post does not match the content but an answer post matches, to the search result

Steps for Testing

Prerequisites:

• 1 Student
• 1 Course

1. Log in to Artemis
2. Navigate into the course
3. If not already existent, create a message in a channel with an answer post and content x
4. Search for content x of the answer post
5. Verify search result includes post, where the answer post matches the content

Testserver States

Note

These badges show the state of the test servers.
Green = Currently available, Red = Currently locked
Click on the badges to get to the test servers.

Review Progress

Code Review

• Code Review 1
• Code Review 2

Manual Tests

• Test 1
• Test 2
• Test 3
• Test 4
• Test 5

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Enhanced message filtering to include both posts and answer posts based on search criteria.
  • Improved retrieval of user-specific posts and associated answer posts.

• Tests

  • Introduced new test methods to ensure robust coverage of search functionalities in messaging, validating retrieval based on specific search criteria for both posts and answers.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The changes involve modifications to the MessageSpecs class to enhance the filtering capabilities for Post and AnswerPost entities. The getSearchTextSpecification and getOwnSpecification methods have been updated to include logic for searching across both message types. Additionally, the MessageIntegrationTest class has been expanded with new test methods to ensure robust validation of the message retrieval functionalities based on specific search criteria.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/MessageSpecs.java	Updated getSearchTextSpecification and getOwnSpecification methods to filter both Post and AnswerPost.
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/MessageIntegrationTest.java	Added test methods for course-wide message retrieval with search text; introduced helper method answerHasContext.

Possibly related PRs

• Development: Update documentation for private messages and search filters #8962: Updates documentation related to message search functionalities, aligning with enhancements made to the getSearchTextSpecification method.
• Communication: Fix an issue where the client does not keep track of the posts on screen #8990: Addresses client-side handling of posts during search operations, relevant to the filtering capabilities enhanced in the main PR.
• Communication: Remove announcements from unresolved filter #9561: Modifies filtering logic for conversations, related to expanded filtering criteria for posts and answer posts.

Suggested labels

client, bugfix, component:Communication

Suggested reviewers

• JohannesStoehr
• krusche
• EneaGore
• florian-glombik

---

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 gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @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 or @coderabbitai title anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

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.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)

src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/MessageSpecs.java (2)

63-66: Consider indexing strategy for performance optimization.

The implementation correctly extends search to answer posts. However, the LEFT JOIN with OR condition might impact query performance on large datasets.

Consider adding the following database optimizations:

1. Create a composite index on answer_post(content, post_id) to improve JOIN performance
2. Consider implementing a full-text search index if supported by your database for better search performance

---

Line range hint 42-121: Consider caching strategy for frequently accessed posts.

The enhanced search functionality now requires additional database joins. To maintain performance as the system scales:

1. Consider implementing result caching for frequently accessed posts
2. Monitor query execution plans and response times after deployment
3. Consider implementing pagination if not already present in the calling code

src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/MessageIntegrationTest.java (1)

524-542: Enhance assertion specificity in the test method.

The test verifies search functionality for course-wide messages, but the assertions could be more specific:

Consider adding these assertions to better validate the search results:

 List<Post> returnedPosts = request.getList("/api/courses/" + courseId + "/messages", HttpStatus.OK, Post.class, params);
-assertThat(returnedPosts).hasSize(existingCourseWideMessages.stream().filter(post -> post.getConversation().getId().equals(courseWideChannelId)
-        && post.getAuthor().getLogin().equals(TEST_PREFIX + "student1") && (post.getContent().contains("Content") || answerHasContext(post.getAnswers(), "Content")))
-        .toList().size());
+// Verify the size
+assertThat(returnedPosts).hasSize(expectedSize);
+// Verify each returned post matches the search criteria
+assertThat(returnedPosts).allMatch(post ->
+    post.getConversation().getId().equals(courseWideChannelId) &&
+    post.getAuthor().getLogin().equals(TEST_PREFIX + "student1") &&
+    (post.getContent().contains("Content") || answerHasContext(post.getAnswers(), "Content"))
+);
+// Verify posts are from course-wide channel
+assertThat(returnedPosts).allMatch(post ->
+    post.getConversation() instanceof Channel && ((Channel) post.getConversation()).getIsCourseWide()
+);

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between ac4c2c1 and 12804c0.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/MessageSpecs.java (4 hunks)
• src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/MessageIntegrationTest.java (2 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Path-based instructions (2)

src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/MessageSpecs.java (1)

Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports

src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/MessageIntegrationTest.java (1)

Pattern src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: true

🔇 Additional comments (2)

src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/MessageSpecs.java (2)

42-43: LGTM! Documentation accurately reflects the enhanced search functionality.

The updated Javadoc clearly explains that both messages and answer posts are now included in the search results.

---

Line range hint 107-121: Verify test coverage for answer post filtering.

The implementation correctly extends the own posts filter to include authored answer posts. However, we should ensure comprehensive test coverage.

Let's verify the test coverage:

✅ Verification successful

Let me search for test files related to this functionality.

---

Let me check the test implementation details to verify if the answer post filtering is properly tested.

---

Let me check the test implementation in AnswerMessageIntegrationTest since it seems more relevant to our verification.

---

Based on the test files analyzed, I can now generate the final response:

Test coverage for answer post filtering is comprehensive and verified

The implementation is well-tested through multiple test cases in both MessageIntegrationTest and AnswerMessageIntegrationTest:

• Tests verify filtering own posts with answer content search
• Tests cover answer post creation and association
• Integration tests validate the complete flow including:
  • Filtering by own posts with answers
  • Answer post content verification
  • Answer post author verification

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for test cases covering the getOwnSpecification method
rg -A 10 "getOwnSpecification.*filterToOwn.*userId" --type java

Length of output: 3300

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for test files related to MessageSpecs and ConversationMessageRepository
fd -e java -g "*Test.java" | xargs rg -l "MessageSpecs|ConversationMessageRepository"

# Search for test cases that might test the own post filtering functionality
rg -A 10 "filterToOwn|getOwnSpecification" --type java --glob "*Test.java"

Length of output: 16722

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for test setup and assertions related to answer posts in MessageIntegrationTest
rg -B 10 -A 10 "answerHasContext|getAnswers" src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/MessageIntegrationTest.java

# Look for test data setup in AbstractConversationTest
rg -B 5 -A 10 "existingCourseWideMessages|setupTestData" src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/AbstractConversationTest.java

Length of output: 6945

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for test setup and assertions specifically related to answer posts in AnswerMessageIntegrationTest
rg -B 15 -A 5 "student1\.getId\(\)\.equals\(post\.getAuthor\(\)\.getId\(\))" src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/AnswerMessageIntegrationTest.java

# Look for test data setup related to answer posts
rg -B 5 -A 10 "setupAnswerPost|createAnswerPost" src/test/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/AnswerMessageIntegrationTest.java

Length of output: 9298

[HawKhiem]

Tested on TS3. I presume you meant messages in communication by "posts". Please correct me if I was testing the wrong thing. Everything works as described. One small thing though: After done searching for something then click on the Refresh button, I expect the origin view of the channel would show up with all the messages. But instead still my search result show up, it would only revert back to the original view after I click on another channel then go back, or by emptying the search bar and click on the search symbol (which happened to work in this case because I don't have any other public posts on other channel)

Untitled.video.-.Made.with.Clipchamp.mp4

[JohannesStoehr]

Code looks good apart from one difficult to understand part

Adressed in last commit

[JohannesStoehr]

Code

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)

src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/MessageSpecs.java (1)

119-122: Consider extracting common join logic.

The implementation is correct, but there's potential code duplication with the join creation pattern seen in getSearchTextSpecification. Consider extracting the common join logic into a reusable helper method.

Consider adding a helper method:

+private static Join<Post, AnswerPost> getAnswerPostJoin(Root<Post> root) {
+    return root.join(Post_.ANSWERS, JoinType.LEFT);
+}

 public static Specification<Post> getOwnSpecification(boolean filterToOwn, Long userId) {
     return ((root, query, criteriaBuilder) -> {
         if (!filterToOwn) {
             return null;
         }
         else {
-            Join<Post, AnswerPost> answersJoin = root.join(Post_.ANSWERS, JoinType.LEFT);
+            Join<Post, AnswerPost> answersJoin = getAnswerPostJoin(root);
             Predicate searchInAnswerContent = criteriaBuilder.equal(answersJoin.get(AnswerPost_.AUTHOR).get(User_.ID), userId);
             Predicate isPostOwner = criteriaBuilder.equal(root.get(Post_.AUTHOR).get(User_.ID), userId);
             return criteriaBuilder.or(isPostOwner, searchInAnswerContent);
         }
     });
 }

This helper method could also be used in getSearchTextSpecification and other methods that need to join with answer posts.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 12804c0 and ed84438.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/MessageSpecs.java (4 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Path-based instructions (1)

src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/MessageSpecs.java (1)

Pattern src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports

🔇 Additional comments (2)

src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/MessageSpecs.java (2)

42-43: LGTM! Documentation accurately reflects the new functionality.

The updated Javadoc clearly describes that both messages and answer posts are now included in the search functionality.

---

63-66: Verify database performance impact.

The addition of LEFT JOINs in both specifications might affect query performance. Please ensure that:

1. Appropriate indexes exist on the joined columns
2. The query execution plan remains efficient

Also applies to: 119-122

✅ Verification successful

Performance impact is minimal, no database changes required

The LEFT JOIN on answers is safe because:

1. The Post entity already eagerly loads answers (@OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER))
2. The repository uses optimized query patterns:
   • First fetches only IDs with specifications
   • Then loads full entities with a single optimized query using findByPostIdsWithEagerRelationships
3. The existing eager loading query already includes answers with their relationships:

   LEFT JOIN FETCH p.answers a
       LEFT JOIN FETCH a.reactions
       LEFT JOIN FETCH a.post
       LEFT JOIN FETCH a.author

The search specification change aligns with the existing query optimization strategy and won't degrade performance.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for existing database indexes and constraints
echo "Searching for database index definitions..."
fd -e sql -e java | xargs rg -l "CREATE.*INDEX|@Index"

echo "Searching for existing query performance tests..."
fd -e java | xargs rg -l "MessageSpecs.*getSearchTextSpecification|MessageSpecs.*getOwnSpecification.*performance"

Length of output: 476

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the content of the repository file found and related entity classes
echo "Checking ConversationMessageRepository content..."
cat src/main/java/de/tum/cit/aet/artemis/communication/repository/ConversationMessageRepository.java

echo -e "\nChecking Post and AnswerPost entity definitions..."
fd "Post.java|AnswerPost.java" --type f --exec cat {}

echo -e "\nChecking for any existing JPA indexes in the codebase..."
rg "@Index|@Table\(.*indexes" -A 3

Length of output: 18504

[asliayk]

tested locally and works as expected

[JanaNF]

Manual tested on TS2. Worked as expected.

[Feras797]

Tested on TS6, works as described

[kevinfischer4]

Tested on TS1, works as expected. Cool feature!

[krusche]

Code looks good to me. We can implement additional search improvements in a follow-up