chore(idempotency): expiration timestamp rounded to the nearest second

[arnabrahman]

Summary

For consistency, we need to align timestamp formats for expiration and in_progress_expiration in idempotency table. To achieve this we have to round off expiration attribute.

Changes

• Round off the return value of getExpiryTimestamp function
• Fix failing tests because of the rounding off

Issue number: #2298

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.

[dreamorosi]

Hi @arnabrahman - thank you for opening this PR!

While I review it and run tests, could I please ask you to leave a comment under the linked issue so that I can assign it to you? (GitHub doesn't let me do it unless you interact with it first).

[dreamorosi]

Integration tests are failing on this branch - I need to check why as it's not immediately clear from the logs.

[arnabrahman]

Regarding the failing integration test, it's possible that the sorting order is being affected because we are rounding off the expiration value.

https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-typescript/blob/main/packages/idempotency/tests/e2e/makeIdempotent.test.ts#L205-L207

For example, previously if this was the items array with expiryAttr:

const items = [
      { id: 1, foo: 'bar' , expiryAttr: 0.6},
      { id: 2, foo: 'baq' , expiryAttr: 0.7},
      { id: 3, foo: 'bar' , expiryAttr: 0.8},
],

After sorting, the items array would remain unchanged.

But now, if the value is rounded off, the items array would look like this for the same value:

const items = [
      { id: 1, foo: 'bar' , expiryAttr: 1},
      { id: 2, foo: 'baq' , expiryAttr: 1},
      { id: 3, foo: 'bar' , expiryAttr: 1,
],

And after sorting, the items array will look like this:

const items = [
      { id: 3, foo: 'bar' , expiryAttr: 1},
      { id: 2, foo: 'baq' , expiryAttr: 1},
      { id: 1, foo: 'bar' , expiryAttr: 1},
],

This is likely why we get id: 3 in the first position. (https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-typescript/actions/runs/9195366267/job/25291037147#step:8:538)

However, I'm not entirely certain. To validate this, need the actual values for expiryAttr in e2e.

@dreamorosi

[dreamorosi]

Thank you for looking into it, you are exactly right.

I have tested this on my local branch and it works, I'd suggest to replace the sorting here with this:

const idempotencyRecordsItems = [
  idempotencyRecords.Items?.find(
    (record) =>
      record.customId ===
      `${functionNameCustomConfig}#${payloadHashes[0]}`
  ),
  idempotencyRecords.Items?.find(
    (record) =>
      record.customId ===
      `${functionNameCustomConfig}#${payloadHashes[1]}`
  ),
  idempotencyRecords.Items?.find(
    (record) =>
      record.customId ===
      `${functionNameCustomConfig}#${payloadHashes[2]}`
  ),
];

and the one here with this:

const idempotencyRecordsItems = [
  idempotencyRecords.Items?.find(
    (record) => record.id === `${functionNameDefault}#${payloadHashes[0]}`
  ),
  idempotencyRecords.Items?.find(
    (record) => record.id === `${functionNameDefault}#${payloadHashes[1]}`
  ),
];

Once replaced I'll run the tests again and if green, I think we should be able to merge!

[arnabrahman]

I have updated the tests. You can try it now, @dreamorosi

[dreamorosi]

Thank you - seems to work now, great job!

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[dreamorosi]

Thank you so much for this PR and for iterating on the feedback.