`@computed` fields from mixin types (`with`) cause `column does not exist` error when the model is explicitly included by lsmith77 · Pull Request #2539 · zenstackhq/zenstack

lsmith77 · 2026-03-31T18:48:56Z

failing test to illustrate #2540 along with a one line fix

Summary by CodeRabbit

Tests
- Added an end-to-end Vitest verifying computed fields inherited from a mixin are populated on child records both when queried directly and when returned via a parent query with nested includes.
Bug Fix
- Broadened computed-field detection so inherited/aggregated computed fields are surfaced correctly, preventing missing computed values for nested includes.

coderabbitai · 2026-03-31T18:49:10Z

Note

Reviews paused

It looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the reviews.auto_review.auto_pause_after_reviewed_commits setting.

Use the following commands to manage reviews:

@coderabbitai resume to resume automatic reviews.
@coderabbitai review to trigger a single review.

Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:

▶️ Resume reviews
🔍 Trigger review

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Adds a Vitest e2e test for a mixin-inherited computed field and updates the TypeScript schema generator to include computed fields from all discovered fields (including mixins) when emitting computedFields.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
E2E Test: computed-field nested include `tests/e2e/orm/client-api/computed-field-nested-include.test.ts`	Adds a Vitest e2e test that defines a `ParentRelated` mixin with a nullable computed field `parentCode`, `Parent` and `Child` models, creates sample data, and asserts `Child.parentCode` is populated both when querying children directly and when children are returned via `Parent` with `include: { children: true }`.
Schema generator: computed field detection `packages/sdk/src/ts-schema-generator.ts`	Modifies `TsSchemaGenerator.createDataModelObject` to derive `computedFields` from `allFields` (via `getAllFields(dm)`) instead of only `dm.fields`, allowing computed fields inherited through mixins to be emitted in the schema.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Possibly related issues

RestApiHandler: @computed fields from mixin types (with) cause column does not exist error when the model is explicitly included #2540 — Addresses detection of @computed fields inherited via mixins so nested includes can reference those computed-field columns.

Poem

🐇 I hopped through fields and schema trees,
Mixins whispered codes on every breeze,
Parents include children, no column lost,
Tests now dance without runtime cost,
Nibbling carrots — CI passes with ease 🥕

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title directly and specifically describes the main issue being fixed: `@computed` fields from mixin types causing column-does-not-exist errors in explicit includes, which aligns with the test case and code fix in the changeset.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with 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.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

coderabbitai

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

tests/e2e/orm/client-api/computed-field-nested-include.test.ts (1)
60-60: Prefer typed validation over as any to maintain type-safety in this regression test.

Line 60 suppresses compiler checks that could catch future API/schema drift. The options object should use satisfies to validate against the function signature while preserving flexibility with string schemas:
♻️ Suggested refactor
-            } as any,
+            } satisfies Parameters<typeof createTestClient>[1],
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@tests/e2e/orm/client-api/computed-field-nested-include.test.ts` at line 60,
The test currently uses an unsafe cast ("as any") for the options object;
replace that cast with TypeScript's "satisfies" operator to validate the object
against the real API parameter type (for example the parameter type of the
client function under test, e.g. Parameters<typeof <clientFunction>>[0] or the
exported options type from the API), so the literal keeps flexible string-schema
values but still gets compile-time validation; locate the options object in
computed-field-nested-include.test.ts and change the "as any" to a "satisfies
<expected parameter type>" check (import or reference the appropriate
function/type used by the test).

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Nitpick comments:
In `@tests/e2e/orm/client-api/computed-field-nested-include.test.ts`:
- Line 60: The test currently uses an unsafe cast ("as any") for the options
object; replace that cast with TypeScript's "satisfies" operator to validate the
object against the real API parameter type (for example the parameter type of
the client function under test, e.g. Parameters<typeof <clientFunction>>[0] or
the exported options type from the API), so the literal keeps flexible
string-schema values but still gets compile-time validation; locate the options
object in computed-field-nested-include.test.ts and change the "as any" to a
"satisfies <expected parameter type>" check (import or reference the appropriate
function/type used by the test).

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 3260908e-0086-4ab1-91a3-d57d0a4b7523

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 80f364a and 9e94d09.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

tests/e2e/orm/client-api/computed-field-nested-include.test.ts

coderabbitai

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

packages/sdk/src/ts-schema-generator.ts (1)

456-456: Reuse allFields instead of calling getAllFields(dm) twice.

This avoids a second recursive walk and keeps field selection logic centralized.

♻️ Suggested cleanup

-        const computedFields = getAllFields(dm).filter((f) => hasAttribute(f, '@computed'));
+        const computedFields = allFields.filter((f) => hasAttribute(f, '@computed'));

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@packages/sdk/src/ts-schema-generator.ts` at line 456, The code calls
getAllFields(dm) again when computing computedFields causing an extra recursive
walk; instead reuse the existing allFields array (the variable already holding
getAllFields(dm) results) and filter that for hasAttribute(f, '@computed') so
computedFields = allFields.filter(f => hasAttribute(f, '@computed')); update the
reference to use allFields and remove the duplicate getAllFields(dm) call.

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Nitpick comments:
In `@packages/sdk/src/ts-schema-generator.ts`:
- Line 456: The code calls getAllFields(dm) again when computing computedFields
causing an extra recursive walk; instead reuse the existing allFields array (the
variable already holding getAllFields(dm) results) and filter that for
hasAttribute(f, '@computed') so computedFields = allFields.filter(f =>
hasAttribute(f, '@computed')); update the reference to use allFields and remove
the duplicate getAllFields(dm) call.

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 7231e313-2b0c-4e75-a446-41409eea847c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0653d1d and 397146d.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

packages/sdk/src/ts-schema-generator.ts
tests/e2e/orm/client-api/computed-field-nested-include.test.ts

…hema property

lsmith77 mentioned this pull request Mar 31, 2026

RestApiHandler: @computed fields from mixin types (with) cause column does not exist error when the model is explicitly included #2540

Open

coderabbitai bot reviewed Mar 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

lsmith77 force-pushed the computed-field-nested-include.test branch from 9e94d09 to 2abea97 Compare April 1, 2026 18:16

lsmith77 force-pushed the computed-field-nested-include.test branch 2 times, most recently from 0653d1d to 397146d Compare April 9, 2026 09:15

coderabbitai bot reviewed Apr 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

lsmith77 force-pushed the computed-field-nested-include.test branch from 397146d to adc753f Compare April 9, 2026 09:38

include mixin-inherited @computed fields in model's computedFields sc…

afc9d44

…hema property

lsmith77 force-pushed the computed-field-nested-include.test branch from adc753f to afc9d44 Compare April 9, 2026 10:22

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

`@computed` fields from mixin types (`with`) cause `column does not exist` error when the model is explicitly included#2539

`@computed` fields from mixin types (`with`) cause `column does not exist` error when the model is explicitly included#2539
lsmith77 wants to merge 1 commit intozenstackhq:devfrom
lsmith77:computed-field-nested-include.test

lsmith77 commented Mar 31, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 31, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Reviews paused

Walkthrough

Changes

Estimated code review effort

Possibly related issues

Poem

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

Uh oh!

Conversation

lsmith77 commented Mar 31, 2026 • edited by coderabbitai bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 31, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviews paused

Walkthrough

Changes

Estimated code review effort

Possibly related issues

Poem

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

lsmith77 commented Mar 31, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 31, 2026 •

edited

Loading