* feat(dimensions): PR10 advanced — custom dimensions, hierarchy, account rules, commit enforcement The final rung of the dimensions ladder (dev_docs/dimensions_implementation_plan.md §7 row 10): - custom dimensions: POST /api/dimensions creates registry dims (next free SIE number >= 20 when omitted; explicit numbers allowed — SIE import already mints reserved ones); register gets a 'Ny dimension' dialog with a quiet Avancerat disclosure for the #UNDERDIM parent; GET now carries parent_sie_dim_no (the column + SIE round-trip existed since PR1/PR5 — this exposes it) - account_dimension_rules (migration 20260703120000): one rule per (account, dimension) — required / default / fixed, per-rule is_active, company-scoped RLS, composite FK to the registry, value-presence CHECK - enforcement, opt-in BY CONSTRUCTION (zero rules = engine byte-identical; deliberately NO settings toggle — a rule that exists but is ignored is worse than either extreme): default/fixed apply onto line bags at draft creation (fixed overwrites, default fills); required asserts at commitEntry with a Swedish MANDATORY_DIMENSION_MISSING naming every account + dimension; the bulk-book route runs the same policy before its RPC; storno/correction paths never pass through commitEntry so history always reverses regardless of policy; rule fetches fail open incl. thrown exceptions - chart of accounts: per-account Dimensionsregler section in EditAccountDialog (Krävs/Förval/Låst, value picker, pause switch), gated on the existing dimensions toggle, quiet when empty - pickers: LineDimensionFields is registry-driven (one combobox per active dimension, cached fetch, hardcoded 1/6 fallback) — every existing mount lights up custom dims with zero changes - agent briefing: per-dimension required_on_accounts/default_on_accounts so agents self-correct instead of bouncing off the policy error - rules CRUD API with existence/active/company validation and qualified DTO ids; firm_id FK deferred until the firms table lands (per plan) 39 new tests (pure-fn rules, engine enforcement, both new API surfaces, pg-real RLS/CHECK/cascade suite); full suite 6,791 green; migration replayed on a fresh container. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix: renumber migration to 20260703200000 — version collision with prod The concurrent session shipped pending_operations_add_link_document_to_voucher as 20260703120000 today; the Supabase preview branch (cloned from prod) rejected the duplicate version key. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix: review round — auto-pick retry on collision, fail-open warnings, query schema - POST /api/dimensions retries once past a concurrent number claim when the number was auto-picked (explicit choices still 409) - every fail-open skip of the dimension-rules policy now logs a structured warning (engine draft/commit paths + bulk-book) — deliberate fail-open, but observable - GET /api/dimensions/rules validates its query through ListDimensionRulesQuerySchema instead of an inline regex Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
389 lines
13 KiB
TypeScript
389 lines
13 KiB
TypeScript
import { describe, it, expect, vi, beforeEach } from 'vitest'
|
|
import type { JournalEntryStatus } from '@/types'
|
|
|
|
// Mock event bus
|
|
vi.mock('@/lib/events', () => ({
|
|
eventBus: { emit: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue([]) },
|
|
}))
|
|
|
|
vi.mock('@/lib/logger', () => ({
|
|
createLogger: () => ({
|
|
info: vi.fn(),
|
|
warn: vi.fn(),
|
|
error: vi.fn(),
|
|
child: vi.fn().mockReturnThis(),
|
|
}),
|
|
}))
|
|
|
|
import { commitEntry, getNextVoucherNumber, createJournalEntry } from '../engine'
|
|
import { runWithActor } from '../actor-context-node'
|
|
import { BookkeepingDatabaseError } from '../errors'
|
|
|
|
describe('voucher number atomicity', () => {
|
|
beforeEach(() => {
|
|
vi.clearAllMocks()
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('getNextVoucherNumber returns incrementing numbers from RPC', async () => {
|
|
let callCount = 0
|
|
const supabase = {
|
|
rpc: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => {
|
|
callCount++
|
|
return Promise.resolve({ data: callCount, error: null })
|
|
}),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const n1 = await getNextVoucherNumber(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'fp-1', 'A')
|
|
const n2 = await getNextVoucherNumber(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'fp-1', 'A')
|
|
const n3 = await getNextVoucherNumber(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'fp-1', 'A')
|
|
|
|
expect(n1).toBe(1)
|
|
expect(n2).toBe(2)
|
|
expect(n3).toBe(3)
|
|
expect(supabase.rpc).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(3)
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('getNextVoucherNumber throws on RPC error', async () => {
|
|
const supabase = {
|
|
rpc: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ data: null, error: { message: 'connection lost' } }),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
await expect(
|
|
getNextVoucherNumber(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'fp-1', 'A')
|
|
).rejects.toThrow(BookkeepingDatabaseError)
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* commitEntry uses the atomic commit_journal_entry RPC which increments the
|
|
* voucher sequence and updates the entry status in one transaction.
|
|
* If the RPC fails (e.g., balance trigger rejection), the sequence increment
|
|
* rolls back — no burned number, no gap.
|
|
*/
|
|
it('commitEntry RPC failure does not burn a sequence number', async () => {
|
|
const supabase = {
|
|
from: vi.fn(),
|
|
rpc: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: null,
|
|
error: { message: 'Journal entry is not balanced: debit=1000 credit=500' },
|
|
}),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
await expect(
|
|
commitEntry(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'user-1', 'entry-1')
|
|
).rejects.toThrow(BookkeepingDatabaseError)
|
|
|
|
// The atomic RPC was called — it failed, rolling back both the
|
|
// sequence increment and the status update. No burned number.
|
|
expect(supabase.rpc).toHaveBeenCalledWith('commit_journal_entry', {
|
|
p_company_id: 'co-1',
|
|
p_entry_id: 'entry-1',
|
|
p_commit_method: null,
|
|
p_rubric_version: null,
|
|
p_actor_type: null,
|
|
p_actor_label: null,
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
// No line/entry fetch happened — the RPC handles everything atomically.
|
|
// (PR10: commitEntry now also probes account_dimension_rules first; the
|
|
// bare mock makes that probe fail open, which is exactly the posture.)
|
|
expect(supabase.from).not.toHaveBeenCalledWith('journal_entries')
|
|
expect(supabase.from).not.toHaveBeenCalledWith('journal_entry_lines')
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('commitEntry succeeds via atomic RPC and returns posted entry', async () => {
|
|
const postedEntry = {
|
|
id: 'entry-1',
|
|
company_id: 'co-1',
|
|
fiscal_period_id: 'fp-1',
|
|
voucher_series: 'A',
|
|
voucher_number: 3,
|
|
status: 'posted' as JournalEntryStatus,
|
|
lines: [],
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const supabase = {
|
|
from: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => ({
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
single: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ data: postedEntry, error: null }),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
})),
|
|
// Atomic RPC returns the assigned voucher number
|
|
rpc: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ data: [{ voucher_number: 3 }], error: null }),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const result = await commitEntry(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'user-1', 'entry-1')
|
|
|
|
expect(result.voucher_number).toBe(3)
|
|
expect(result.status).toBe('posted')
|
|
expect(supabase.rpc).toHaveBeenCalledWith('commit_journal_entry', {
|
|
p_company_id: 'co-1',
|
|
p_entry_id: 'entry-1',
|
|
p_commit_method: null,
|
|
p_rubric_version: null,
|
|
p_actor_type: null,
|
|
p_actor_label: null,
|
|
})
|
|
// from() called once to fetch the complete entry with lines
|
|
expect(supabase.from).toHaveBeenCalledWith('journal_entries')
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Actor attribution (migration 20260619120000): commitEntry forwards the
|
|
* surrounding runWithActor() scope to the RPC so the immutable layer can
|
|
* record WHO relayed the commit. Outside a scope the params stay null
|
|
* (asserted by the two tests above).
|
|
*/
|
|
it('commitEntry forwards the runWithActor scope to the RPC', async () => {
|
|
const postedEntry = {
|
|
id: 'entry-1',
|
|
company_id: 'co-1',
|
|
voucher_number: 1,
|
|
status: 'posted' as JournalEntryStatus,
|
|
lines: [],
|
|
}
|
|
const supabase = {
|
|
from: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => ({
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
single: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ data: postedEntry, error: null }),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
})),
|
|
rpc: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ data: [{ voucher_number: 1 }], error: null }),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
await runWithActor({ type: 'api_key', label: 'Claude Desktop' }, () =>
|
|
commitEntry(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'user-1', 'entry-1', 'api_key')
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
expect(supabase.rpc).toHaveBeenCalledWith('commit_journal_entry', {
|
|
p_company_id: 'co-1',
|
|
p_entry_id: 'entry-1',
|
|
p_commit_method: 'api_key',
|
|
p_rubric_version: null,
|
|
p_actor_type: 'api_key',
|
|
p_actor_label: 'Claude Desktop',
|
|
})
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* getNextVoucherNumber is still used by reverseEntry and storno-service.
|
|
* Those flows INSERT a new entry (not UPDATE a draft), so the atomic
|
|
* commit_journal_entry RPC doesn't apply. Burned numbers can still occur
|
|
* in reversal/correction flows if the INSERT fails after the counter
|
|
* increments. This is documented and expected.
|
|
*/
|
|
it('getNextVoucherNumber remains available for reversal/storno flows', async () => {
|
|
const supabase = {
|
|
rpc: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ data: 7, error: null }),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const num = await getNextVoucherNumber(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'fp-1', 'B')
|
|
|
|
expect(num).toBe(7)
|
|
expect(supabase.rpc).toHaveBeenCalledWith('next_voucher_number', {
|
|
p_company_id: 'co-1',
|
|
p_fiscal_period_id: 'fp-1',
|
|
p_series: 'B',
|
|
})
|
|
})
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
describe('createJournalEntry orphan draft cleanup', () => {
|
|
beforeEach(() => {
|
|
vi.clearAllMocks()
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
* Regression test for #292: when commit_journal_entry RPC fails (e.g. overload
|
|
* ambiguity, balance trigger, period lock), the draft created by createDraftEntry
|
|
* must be cancelled so it doesn't linger as an undeletable stuck draft.
|
|
*/
|
|
it('cancels the draft when commit RPC fails', async () => {
|
|
const draftId = 'entry-1'
|
|
const cancelUpdate = vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ error: null }),
|
|
}),
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
const supabase = {
|
|
from: vi.fn().mockImplementation((table: string) => {
|
|
if (table === 'fiscal_periods') {
|
|
return {
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
single: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: { name: 'FY 2025', period_start: '2025-01-01', period_end: '2025-12-31' },
|
|
error: null,
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
if (table === 'chart_of_accounts') {
|
|
return {
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
in: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: [
|
|
{ account_number: '1930', id: 'acc-1930' },
|
|
{ account_number: '1510', id: 'acc-1510' },
|
|
],
|
|
error: null,
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
if (table === 'journal_entries') {
|
|
return {
|
|
insert: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
single: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: { id: draftId, status: 'draft' as JournalEntryStatus },
|
|
error: null,
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
single: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: { id: draftId, status: 'draft', lines: [] },
|
|
error: null,
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
update: cancelUpdate,
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
if (table === 'journal_entry_lines') {
|
|
return {
|
|
insert: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ error: null }),
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
return {}
|
|
}),
|
|
// commit_journal_entry RPC fails — simulates overload ambiguity or balance error
|
|
rpc: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: null,
|
|
error: { message: 'Could not choose the best candidate function' },
|
|
}),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
await expect(
|
|
createJournalEntry(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'user-1', {
|
|
fiscal_period_id: 'fp-1',
|
|
entry_date: '2025-06-15',
|
|
description: 'Payment',
|
|
source_type: 'invoice_paid',
|
|
lines: [
|
|
{ account_number: '1930', debit_amount: 1000, credit_amount: 0 },
|
|
{ account_number: '1510', debit_amount: 0, credit_amount: 1000 },
|
|
],
|
|
})
|
|
).rejects.toThrow(BookkeepingDatabaseError)
|
|
|
|
// The orphan draft must have been cancelled with CAS guard (status='draft')
|
|
expect(cancelUpdate).toHaveBeenCalledWith({ status: 'cancelled' })
|
|
const firstEq = cancelUpdate.mock.results[0].value.eq
|
|
expect(firstEq).toHaveBeenCalledWith('id', draftId)
|
|
const secondEq = firstEq.mock.results[0].value.eq
|
|
expect(secondEq).toHaveBeenCalledWith('status', 'draft')
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('surfaces original commit error even if cleanup update fails', async () => {
|
|
const draftId = 'entry-1'
|
|
|
|
const supabase = {
|
|
from: vi.fn().mockImplementation((table: string) => {
|
|
if (table === 'fiscal_periods') {
|
|
return {
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
single: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: { name: 'FY 2025', period_start: '2025-01-01', period_end: '2025-12-31' },
|
|
error: null,
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
if (table === 'chart_of_accounts') {
|
|
return {
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
in: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: [
|
|
{ account_number: '1930', id: 'acc-1930' },
|
|
{ account_number: '1510', id: 'acc-1510' },
|
|
],
|
|
error: null,
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
if (table === 'journal_entries') {
|
|
return {
|
|
insert: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
single: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: { id: draftId, status: 'draft' as JournalEntryStatus },
|
|
error: null,
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
select: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
eq: vi.fn().mockReturnValue({
|
|
single: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: { id: draftId, status: 'draft', lines: [] },
|
|
error: null,
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
}),
|
|
// Cleanup throws — original error should still propagate
|
|
update: vi.fn().mockImplementation(() => {
|
|
throw new Error('Network error during rollback')
|
|
}),
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
if (table === 'journal_entry_lines') {
|
|
return {
|
|
insert: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({ error: null }),
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
return {}
|
|
}),
|
|
rpc: vi.fn().mockResolvedValue({
|
|
data: null,
|
|
error: { message: 'Period is locked' },
|
|
}),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
await expect(
|
|
createJournalEntry(supabase as never, 'co-1', 'user-1', {
|
|
fiscal_period_id: 'fp-1',
|
|
entry_date: '2025-06-15',
|
|
description: 'Payment',
|
|
source_type: 'invoice_paid',
|
|
lines: [
|
|
{ account_number: '1930', debit_amount: 1000, credit_amount: 0 },
|
|
{ account_number: '1510', debit_amount: 0, credit_amount: 1000 },
|
|
],
|
|
})
|
|
// Original commit error surfaces, not the cleanup error
|
|
).rejects.toThrow('Period is locked')
|
|
})
|
|
})
|