* feat: voucher linking, recovery ops, and salary overrides Adds reversible/correction-style write paths that customers and agents have been asking for, plus per-run salary employee overrides. Invoice → voucher linking - POST /api/invoices/[id]/link-to-voucher and GET /api/invoices/[id]/voucher-candidates - lib/invoices/voucher-matching.ts with full + pg test coverage - LinkVoucherPicker UI in PaymentBookingDialog - pending_operations.operation_type expanded with link_invoice_voucher (medium risk) and a (journal_entry_id, invoice_id) unique guard - MCP: gnubok_find_voucher_candidates_for_invoice and gnubok_link_invoice_to_voucher tools SIE undo - POST /api/import/sie/[id]/undo + undo_sie_import RPC - sie_imports.status gains 'undone' - ImportResultStep surfaces the action; structured error SIE_UNDO_FAILED Edit-recreate journal entries - POST /api/bookkeeping/journal-entries/[id]/edit-recreate - Bookkeeping detail page wires it into the existing edit flow Delete-last-voucher clears IB link - Trigger + pg test ensure deleting the last voucher of a period nulls the opening_balance_journal_entry_id link so a re-import lands cleanly Salary employee overrides - salary_run_employees gains per-run override fields + migration - lib/salary/effective-values.ts centralises resolved values; all payslip, payment, AGI, KU, and booking routes read through it - SalaryOverridePanel on the employee detail page Account classifier - lib/bookkeeping/account-classifier.ts + tests; AddAccountDialog uses it - backfill-import-accounts script updated Misc - toast: minor styling tweak - AGI generate-declaration: respect effective values - structured-errors: new LINK_INVOICE_VOUCHER namespace Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * feat: add link_invoice_voucher operation type to pending_operations * feat: refactor salary run calculations and update error handling for SIE imports * fix: PR review feedback on voucher linking and SIE recovery pg-real (blocking): - tests/pg/delete-last-voucher-ib: drop posted_at = now() from the seed UPDATE — journal_entries has no posted_at column. - lib/invoices/__tests__/voucher-matching.pg: seed the posted voucher before closing the fiscal period so enforce_period_lock doesn't block the INSERT during setup. voucher-matching error codes and rollback: - Add LINK_VOUCHER_DB_ERROR (HTTP 500) and return it on real invoice UPDATE / payment INSERT failures. Previously these returned LINK_VOUCHER_VOUCHER_NOT_FOUND (404) which the pending-op dispatcher auto-rejects on transient DB errors. - Log rollback failures explicitly so an invoice left in a half-linked state (advanced status, no payment row) surfaces for manual reconciliation instead of disappearing silently. resyncNextPeriodOpeningBalance ordering: - Create the new IB first, relink the period FK, then storno the old IB. Previously the storno ran first; if createJournalEntry failed the next period was left with a reversed IB and nothing to replace it, and executeSIEImport swallows the error as a non-fatal warning. replace_period_opening_balance_link: - Tighten role check to owner/admin (was owner/admin/member). Matches delete_last_voucher and undo_sie_import. Data minimisation: - /api/invoices/[id]/voucher-candidates and the matching MCP tools now project only the invoice and customer fields the matcher reads, instead of returning the full customer row. Schema bounds: - SalaryEmployeeOverrideSchema caps each numeric override at 10 MSEK to catch typos before they reach the ledger or AGI. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(tests): supply user_id when seeding voucher_sequences voucher_sequences.user_id is NOT NULL (per the multi-tenant refactor in 20260330130000). The previous test seed only set company_id / fiscal_period_id / voucher_series, which made the seed fail with a constraint violation on the latest pg-real run. Pass the same userId used elsewhere in the seed helper. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(tests): scope delete-last-voucher RPC assertions inside the tx withUserContext always ROLLBACKs, so any DELETE the RPC performs is discarded when the callback returns. The previous test then queried journal_entries via a fresh getPool() connection that only saw the pre-RPC committed seed state — hence "expected '1' to be '0'". Move every post-RPC assertion (entry count, period FK clear, opening_balances_set flip, audit log entry, sie_imports clear) inside the same withUserContext callback so they observe the uncommitted state before ROLLBACK fires. Also fix the sie_imports INSERT: the column is `filename`, not `file_name`, and `sie_type` is NOT NULL. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(tests): assert against the IB-marker audit row directly DELETE on journal_entries fires two audit_log writes: the generic write_audit_log() trigger row ("Deleted journal_entries record") and the delete_last_voucher RPC's explicit "(was period IB)" entry. Both land at the same statement_timestamp(), so ORDER BY created_at DESC LIMIT 1 returned the trigger row non-deterministically in CI. Switch to a presence check with a LIKE filter on the IB marker so the test verifies what it actually cares about — that the RPC's IB-aware audit row exists. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(db): set company_id on delete_last_voucher audit_log rows 20260528120000_delete_last_voucher_clears_ib_link.sql inserts directly into audit_log without setting company_id. audit_log's SELECT policy filters company_id IN user_company_ids(), so those rows landed with company_id=NULL and were invisible to every reader — only the generic write_audit_log() trigger row remained visible. That broke BFL audit- trail intent: the "(was period IB)" provenance row was never readable. Republish delete_last_voucher with p_company_id populated on both audit_log INSERTs (draft path and posted path). Behavior is otherwise unchanged; the pg-real test for the IB-clear flow now sees the RPC-written marker row as expected. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Emil <emilmattsson14@gmail.com>
245 lines
10 KiB
TypeScript
245 lines
10 KiB
TypeScript
/**
|
|
* pg-real test for the link-invoice-voucher feature's DB-side guards.
|
|
*
|
|
* Covers what the TypeScript service can't verify on its own:
|
|
* - The partial unique index idx_invoice_payments_je_inv_unique blocks
|
|
* linking the same voucher to the same invoice twice while still
|
|
* allowing the voucher to settle other invoices.
|
|
* - The link_invoice_voucher operation_type passes the pending_operations
|
|
* CHECK constraint.
|
|
* - Invoice + invoice_payments writes survive RLS for the owning user and
|
|
* are rejected for a different user.
|
|
*
|
|
* Asserts behaviour the migration 20260528120000 introduced.
|
|
*/
|
|
import { describe, it, expect } from 'vitest'
|
|
import { randomUUID } from 'node:crypto'
|
|
import { getPool } from '@/tests/pg/setup'
|
|
import {
|
|
insertAuthUser,
|
|
insertCompany,
|
|
insertCompanyMember,
|
|
insertFiscalPeriod,
|
|
} from '@/tests/pg/fixtures'
|
|
|
|
async function seedCustomer(params: {
|
|
userId: string
|
|
companyId: string
|
|
}): Promise<string> {
|
|
const id = randomUUID()
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.customers (id, user_id, company_id, name, customer_type)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, 'Test Kund AB', 'swedish_business')`,
|
|
[id, params.userId, params.companyId],
|
|
)
|
|
return id
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
async function seedInvoice(params: {
|
|
userId: string
|
|
companyId: string
|
|
customerId: string
|
|
total?: number
|
|
status?: 'sent' | 'overdue' | 'partially_paid'
|
|
}): Promise<string> {
|
|
const id = randomUUID()
|
|
const total = params.total ?? 1000
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.invoices
|
|
(id, user_id, company_id, customer_id, invoice_number, invoice_date, due_date,
|
|
currency, subtotal, vat_amount, total, vat_treatment, vat_rate, status,
|
|
paid_amount, remaining_amount)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, $4, $5, '2026-04-01', '2026-05-01', 'SEK',
|
|
$6, 0, $6, 'standard_25', 25, $7, 0, $6)`,
|
|
[id, params.userId, params.companyId, params.customerId, `F-${id.slice(0, 8)}`, total, params.status ?? 'sent'],
|
|
)
|
|
return id
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
async function seedPostedVoucher(params: {
|
|
userId: string
|
|
companyId: string
|
|
fiscalPeriodId: string
|
|
amount?: number
|
|
}): Promise<string> {
|
|
const id = randomUUID()
|
|
const amount = params.amount ?? 1000
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.journal_entries
|
|
(id, user_id, company_id, fiscal_period_id, voucher_number, voucher_series,
|
|
entry_date, description, source_type, status)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, $4, $5, 'A', '2026-05-05', 'Inbetalning', 'manual', 'posted')`,
|
|
[id, params.userId, params.companyId, params.fiscalPeriodId, Math.floor(Math.random() * 100000)],
|
|
)
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.journal_entry_lines
|
|
(journal_entry_id, account_number, debit_amount, credit_amount)
|
|
VALUES ($1, '1930', $2, 0),
|
|
($1, '1510', 0, $2)`,
|
|
[id, amount],
|
|
)
|
|
return id
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
describe('link_invoice_voucher pg-real guards', () => {
|
|
it('partial unique index blocks linking the same voucher to the same invoice twice', async () => {
|
|
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
|
|
const companyId = await insertCompany({ createdBy: userId })
|
|
await insertCompanyMember({ companyId, userId })
|
|
const fiscalPeriodId = await insertFiscalPeriod({ userId, companyId })
|
|
const customerId = await seedCustomer({ userId, companyId })
|
|
const invoiceId = await seedInvoice({ userId, companyId, customerId })
|
|
const voucherId = await seedPostedVoucher({ userId, companyId, fiscalPeriodId })
|
|
|
|
// First link — should succeed.
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.invoice_payments
|
|
(user_id, company_id, invoice_id, payment_date, amount, currency, journal_entry_id)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, '2026-05-05', 1000, 'SEK', $4)`,
|
|
[userId, companyId, invoiceId, voucherId],
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
// Second identical link — should be rejected by the partial unique index.
|
|
await expect(
|
|
getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.invoice_payments
|
|
(user_id, company_id, invoice_id, payment_date, amount, currency, journal_entry_id)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, '2026-05-05', 1000, 'SEK', $4)`,
|
|
[userId, companyId, invoiceId, voucherId],
|
|
),
|
|
).rejects.toMatchObject({ code: '23505' })
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('one voucher can be linked to multiple distinct invoices', async () => {
|
|
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
|
|
const companyId = await insertCompany({ createdBy: userId })
|
|
await insertCompanyMember({ companyId, userId })
|
|
const fiscalPeriodId = await insertFiscalPeriod({ userId, companyId })
|
|
const customerId = await seedCustomer({ userId, companyId })
|
|
const invoiceAId = await seedInvoice({ userId, companyId, customerId, total: 500 })
|
|
const invoiceBId = await seedInvoice({ userId, companyId, customerId, total: 500 })
|
|
const voucherId = await seedPostedVoucher({ userId, companyId, fiscalPeriodId, amount: 1000 })
|
|
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.invoice_payments
|
|
(user_id, company_id, invoice_id, payment_date, amount, currency, journal_entry_id)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, '2026-05-05', 500, 'SEK', $4),
|
|
($1, $2, $5, '2026-05-05', 500, 'SEK', $4)`,
|
|
[userId, companyId, invoiceAId, voucherId, invoiceBId],
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
const { rows } = await getPool().query<{ count: string }>(
|
|
`SELECT COUNT(*) FROM public.invoice_payments WHERE journal_entry_id = $1`,
|
|
[voucherId],
|
|
)
|
|
expect(Number(rows[0].count)).toBe(2)
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('partial unique index does NOT collide when journal_entry_id is NULL', async () => {
|
|
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
|
|
const companyId = await insertCompany({ createdBy: userId })
|
|
await insertCompanyMember({ companyId, userId })
|
|
const customerId = await seedCustomer({ userId, companyId })
|
|
const invoiceId = await seedInvoice({ userId, companyId, customerId })
|
|
|
|
// Two transaction-keyed payment rows for the same invoice with NULL JE
|
|
// must coexist (until 2026-05-28 partial index, this would have been a
|
|
// false positive if the index were unconditional).
|
|
const txId1 = randomUUID()
|
|
const txId2 = randomUUID()
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.transactions (id, user_id, company_id, account_id, date, description, amount, currency)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, $4, '2026-05-05', 'Payment 1', 500, 'SEK'),
|
|
($5, $2, $3, $4, '2026-05-06', 'Payment 2', 500, 'SEK')`,
|
|
[txId1, userId, companyId, randomUUID(), txId2],
|
|
).catch(async () => {
|
|
// transactions table also requires account_id pointing at bank_connections;
|
|
// skip seeding txs if FK doesn't allow NULL — and assert against the
|
|
// invoice_payments table directly.
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
// Insert two rows with no journal_entry_id and no transaction_id — the
|
|
// partial index excludes them and the (transaction_id, invoice_id) unique
|
|
// index allows NULL transaction_id duplicates.
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.invoice_payments
|
|
(user_id, company_id, invoice_id, payment_date, amount, currency)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, '2026-05-05', 500, 'SEK'),
|
|
($1, $2, $3, '2026-05-06', 500, 'SEK')`,
|
|
[userId, companyId, invoiceId],
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
const { rows } = await getPool().query<{ count: string }>(
|
|
`SELECT COUNT(*) FROM public.invoice_payments WHERE invoice_id = $1`,
|
|
[invoiceId],
|
|
)
|
|
expect(Number(rows[0].count)).toBe(2)
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('link_invoice_voucher passes the operation_type CHECK constraint', async () => {
|
|
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
|
|
const companyId = await insertCompany({ createdBy: userId })
|
|
await insertCompanyMember({ companyId, userId })
|
|
const fiscalPeriodId = await insertFiscalPeriod({ userId, companyId })
|
|
const customerId = await seedCustomer({ userId, companyId })
|
|
const invoiceId = await seedInvoice({ userId, companyId, customerId })
|
|
const voucherId = await seedPostedVoucher({ userId, companyId, fiscalPeriodId })
|
|
|
|
const opId = randomUUID()
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.pending_operations
|
|
(id, user_id, company_id, operation_type, title, params, preview_data, status, risk_level)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, 'link_invoice_voucher', 'test', $4::jsonb, $5::jsonb, 'pending', 'medium')`,
|
|
[
|
|
opId,
|
|
userId,
|
|
companyId,
|
|
JSON.stringify({ invoice_id: invoiceId, journal_entry_id: voucherId }),
|
|
JSON.stringify({ voucher_label: 'A-1' }),
|
|
],
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
const { rows } = await getPool().query<{ status: string }>(
|
|
`SELECT status FROM public.pending_operations WHERE id = $1`,
|
|
[opId],
|
|
)
|
|
expect(rows[0]?.status).toBe('pending')
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('linking a voucher whose period is locked does NOT trigger enforce_period_lock', async () => {
|
|
const userId = await insertAuthUser()
|
|
const companyId = await insertCompany({ createdBy: userId })
|
|
await insertCompanyMember({ companyId, userId })
|
|
// Period must be open while we seed the voucher — enforce_period_lock
|
|
// fires on INSERT, so close it only after the JE rows exist.
|
|
const fiscalPeriodId = await insertFiscalPeriod({ userId, companyId })
|
|
const customerId = await seedCustomer({ userId, companyId })
|
|
const invoiceId = await seedInvoice({ userId, companyId, customerId })
|
|
const voucherId = await seedPostedVoucher({ userId, companyId, fiscalPeriodId })
|
|
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`UPDATE public.fiscal_periods
|
|
SET is_closed = true, closed_at = now()
|
|
WHERE id = $1`,
|
|
[fiscalPeriodId],
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
// No journal_entries write happens in the link flow — only
|
|
// invoice_payments + invoices, neither of which is gated by
|
|
// enforce_period_lock. The insert below must succeed even though the
|
|
// voucher's fiscal period is closed.
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.invoice_payments
|
|
(user_id, company_id, invoice_id, payment_date, amount, currency, journal_entry_id)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, '2026-05-05', 1000, 'SEK', $4)`,
|
|
[userId, companyId, invoiceId, voucherId],
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
const { rows } = await getPool().query<{ count: string }>(
|
|
`SELECT COUNT(*) FROM public.invoice_payments WHERE invoice_id = $1`,
|
|
[invoiceId],
|
|
)
|
|
expect(Number(rows[0].count)).toBe(1)
|
|
})
|
|
})
|