[OpenAPI] Add archive for collection #8978

tobias-tengler · 2025-12-05T17:47:42Z

No description provided.

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR introduces a new OpenAPI collection archive system for packaging and managing OpenAPI endpoint and model definitions. The implementation adds a ZIP-based container format with comprehensive APIs for creating, reading, and modifying archives.

Key changes:

Introduces HotChocolate.Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging project with archive functionality
Adds comprehensive test coverage through Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging.Tests
Centralizes target framework configuration using $(OpenApiTargetFrameworks) property

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 22 out of 22 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
`src/Directory.Build.props`	Defines shared `OpenApiTargetFrameworks` property for consistent framework targeting
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/OpenApiCollectionArchive.cs`	Main archive API with create/open/read/write operations for endpoints and models
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/ArchiveSession.cs`	Manages archive session state and temporary file operations
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/ArchiveMetadata.cs`	Defines metadata structure for archive format versioning and content tracking
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/Serializers/ArchiveMetadataSerializer.cs`	JSON serialization logic for archive metadata
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/NameValidator.cs`	Validates endpoint and model names using regex patterns
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/*.cs`	Supporting types (FileNames, FileKind, OpenApiEndpoint, OpenApiModel, enums, options)
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/HotChocolate.Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging.csproj`	New project file for packaging library
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/test/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging.Tests/OpenApiCollectionArchiveTests.cs`	Comprehensive test suite with 30+ test methods covering archive operations
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/test/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging.Tests/HotChocolate.Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging.Tests.csproj`	Test project configuration
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi/HotChocolate..csproj`	Updated to use centralized target frameworks property
`src/HotChocolate/Adapters/Adapters.slnx`	Added new packaging projects to solution
`src/All.slnx`	Added new packaging projects to main solution

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2025-12-05T17:58:18Z

...otChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/Serializers/ArchiveMetadataSerializer.cs

+
+    public static ArchiveMetadata Parse(ReadOnlyMemory<byte> data)
+    {
+        var document = JsonDocument.Parse(data);


The JsonDocument created on line 43 is never disposed, causing a resource leak. Wrap it in a using statement to ensure proper disposal: using var document = JsonDocument.Parse(data);

Suggested change

var document = JsonDocument.Parse(data);

using var document = JsonDocument.Parse(data);

Copilot · 2025-12-05T17:58:19Z

src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/ArchiveSession.cs

+        }
+
+        file ??= FileEntry.Created(path);
+        var stream = File.Open(file.TempPath, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.Write);
+        _files.Add(path, file);


When a file entry is created on line 115-116 but already exists in the archive, the entry is not added to _files dictionary before opening the write stream on line 120. This means on line 121, _files.Add(path, file) will try to add an entry that was already used on line 115, but since it was never added to the dictionary, line 121 succeeds. However, the logic flow is confusing. If the intent is to handle replacement, the file should be added to _files after line 116, not after line 120. Otherwise, multiple calls to OpenWrite for the same path between lines 113-117 could create multiple FileEntry instances.

Suggested change

}

file ??= FileEntry.Created(path);

var stream = File.Open(file.TempPath, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.Write);

_files.Add(path, file);

_files.Add(path, file);

}

file ??= FileEntry.Created(path);

var stream = File.Open(file.TempPath, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.Write);

if (!_files.ContainsKey(path))

{

_files.Add(path, file);

}

Copilot · 2025-12-05T17:58:19Z

src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/ArchiveSession.cs

+
+        await using var readStream = zipEntry.Open();
+        await using var writeStream = File.Open(fileEntry.TempPath, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.Write);
+
+        int read;
+        while ((read = await readStream.ReadAsync(buffer, cancellationToken)) > 0)
+        {
+            consumed += read;
+
+            if (consumed > maxAllowedSize)
+            {
+                throw new InvalidOperationException(
+                    $"File is too large and exceeds the allowed size of {maxAllowedSize}.");
+            }
+
+            await writeStream.WriteAsync(buffer.AsMemory(0, read), cancellationToken);
+        }


The rented buffer from ArrayPool<byte>.Shared.Rent(4096) is never returned to the pool. This causes a memory leak. Add a try-finally block to ensure the buffer is returned using ArrayPool<byte>.Shared.Return(buffer) before the method exits, even if an exception is thrown.

Suggested change

await using var readStream = zipEntry.Open();

await using var writeStream = File.Open(fileEntry.TempPath, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.Write);

int read;

while ((read = await readStream.ReadAsync(buffer, cancellationToken)) > 0)

{

consumed += read;

if (consumed > maxAllowedSize)

{

throw new InvalidOperationException(

$"File is too large and exceeds the allowed size of {maxAllowedSize}.");

}

await writeStream.WriteAsync(buffer.AsMemory(0, read), cancellationToken);

}

try

{

await using var readStream = zipEntry.Open();

await using var writeStream = File.Open(fileEntry.TempPath, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.Write);

int read;

while ((read = await readStream.ReadAsync(buffer, cancellationToken)) > 0)

{

consumed += read;

if (consumed > maxAllowedSize)

{

throw new InvalidOperationException(

$"File is too large and exceeds the allowed size of {maxAllowedSize}.");

}

await writeStream.WriteAsync(buffer.AsMemory(0, read), cancellationToken);

}

}

finally

{

ArrayPool<byte>.Shared.Return(buffer);

}

Copilot · 2025-12-05T17:58:19Z

src/HotChocolate/Adapters/src/Adapters.OpenApi.Packaging/OpenApiCollectionArchive.cs

+    private void TryReturnBuffer(ArrayBufferWriter<byte> buffer)
+    {
+        buffer.Clear();
+
+        var currentBuffer = _buffer;
+        var currentCapacity = _buffer?.Capacity ?? 0;
+
+        if (currentCapacity < buffer.Capacity)
+        {
+            Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref _buffer, buffer, currentBuffer);
+        }


There's a race condition in TryReturnBuffer. Between reading _buffer on line 422 and calling Interlocked.CompareExchange on line 427, another thread could update _buffer, making currentBuffer stale. This could cause the newer buffer to be overwritten with an older one. Consider reading _buffer once and using that value consistently, or restructure the logic to handle concurrent updates correctly.

github-actions · 2025-12-05T18:05:56Z

🚀 Fusion Gateway Performance Results

Simple Composite Query

Constant Load (50 VUs)

Requests/sec	Error Rate
5835.64 req/s	0.00%

📊 Response Time Metrics

Min	Med	Max	Avg	P90	P95
0.79ms	7.11ms	161.12ms	8.42ms	12.93ms	18.53ms

Ramping Load (0→50→500→50 VUs)

Requests/sec	Error Rate
4558.32 req/s	0.00%

📊 Response Time Metrics

Min	Med	Max	Avg	P90	P95
0.68ms	38.77ms	297.59ms	48.73ms	108.85ms	125.55ms

Executed Query

fragment User on User {
  id
  username
  name
}

fragment Review on Review {
  id
  body
}

fragment Product on Product {
  inStock
  name
  price
  shippingEstimate
  upc
  weight
}

query TestQuery {
  topProducts(first: 5) {
    ...Product
    reviews {
      ...Review
      author {
        ...User
      }
    }
  }
}

Deep Recursion Query

Constant Load (50 VUs)

Requests/sec	Error Rate
271.71 req/s	0.00%

📊 Response Time Metrics

Min	Med	Max	Avg	P90	P95
12.65ms	172.98ms	572.72ms	178.61ms	225.84ms	250.18ms

Ramping Load (0→50→500→50 VUs)

Requests/sec	Error Rate
310.43 req/s	0.00%

📊 Response Time Metrics

Min	Med	Max	Avg	P90	P95
3.10ms	686.25ms	1697.58ms	682.61ms	1366.96ms	1473.31ms

Executed Query

fragment User on User {
  id
  username
  name
}

fragment Review on Review {
  id
  body
}

fragment Product on Product {
  inStock
  name
  price
  shippingEstimate
  upc
  weight
}

query TestQuery {
  users {
    ...User
    reviews {
      ...Review
      product {
        ...Product
        reviews {
          ...Review
          author {
            ...User
            reviews {
              ...Review
              product {
                ...Product
              }
            }
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }
  topProducts(first: 5) {
    ...Product
    reviews {
      ...Review
      author {
        ...User
        reviews {
          ...Review
          product {
            ...Product
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

Variable Batching Throughput

Constant Load (50 VUs)

Requests/sec	Error Rate
23884.42 req/s	0.00%

📊 Response Time Metrics

Min	Med	Max	Avg	P90	P95
0.09ms	1.68ms	49.87ms	2.04ms	3.90ms	4.77ms

Ramping Load (0→50→500→50 VUs)

Requests/sec	Error Rate
18857.71 req/s	0.00%

📊 Response Time Metrics

Min	Med	Max	Avg	P90	P95
0.09ms	9.25ms	106.85ms	11.25ms	23.23ms	28.10ms

Executed Query

query TestQuery_8f7a46ce_2(
  $__fusion_1_upc: ID!
  $__fusion_2_price: Long!
  $__fusion_2_weight: Long!
) {
  productByUpc(upc: $__fusion_1_upc) {
    inStock
    shippingEstimate(weight: $__fusion_2_weight, price: $__fusion_2_price)
  }
}

Variables (5 sets batched in single request)

[
  { "__fusion_1_upc": "1", "__fusion_2_price": 899, "__fusion_2_weight": 100 },
  { "__fusion_1_upc": "2", "__fusion_2_price": 1299, "__fusion_2_weight": 1000 },
  { "__fusion_1_upc": "3", "__fusion_2_price": 15, "__fusion_2_weight": 20 },
  { "__fusion_1_upc": "4", "__fusion_2_price": 499, "__fusion_2_weight": 100 },
  { "__fusion_1_upc": "5", "__fusion_2_price": 1299, "__fusion_2_weight": 1000 }
]

No baseline data available for comparison.

Run 19971294427 • Commit 6ded803 • Fri, 05 Dec 2025 18:05:55 GMT

tobias-tengler added 2 commits December 5, 2025 14:16

Add new project

a01b8bc

Implement basic archive

9d9853c

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings December 5, 2025 17:47

github-actions bot added the 🌶️ hot chocolate label Dec 5, 2025

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of tobias-tengler December 5, 2025 17:48 View session

Copilot finished reviewing on behalf of tobias-tengler December 5, 2025 17:50

Copilot AI reviewed Dec 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

[OpenAPI] Add archive for collection #8978

[OpenAPI] Add archive for collection #8978

tobias-tengler commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

	var document = JsonDocument.Parse(data);
	using var document = JsonDocument.Parse(data);

Uh oh!

[OpenAPI] Add archive for collection #8978

Are you sure you want to change the base?

[OpenAPI] Add archive for collection #8978

Conversation

tobias-tengler commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Dec 5, 2025

🚀 Fusion Gateway Performance Results

Simple Composite Query

Deep Recursion Query

Variable Batching Throughput

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants