feat: add data migrations blog#7872
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Argos notifications ↗︎
|
|
Caution Review failedFailed to post review comments WalkthroughAdds a new blog article documenting data migrations in Prisma Next: compares SQL vs TypeScript approaches, shows a Prisma Next ChangesPrisma Next Data Migrations Documentation
Documentation Link Updates
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
apps/blog/content/blog/data-migrations-in-prisma-next/index.mdx (1)
157-158: ⚡ Quick winAvoid absolute wording in the migration-signing security claim.
“Can’t tweak the SQL behind your back” is stronger than necessary. Prefer precise, testable phrasing (for example: tampering is detected and the migration is rejected).
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@apps/blog/content/blog/data-migrations-in-prisma-next/index.mdx` around lines 157 - 158, The sentence claiming an agent "can't tweak the SQL behind your back" is too absolute—update the sentence that mentions ops.json and migration.ts to a precise, testable claim such as: ops.json is signed against the migration.ts it came from so tampering with the generated SQL is detectable and a mismatched signature causes the migration to be rejected (or similar wording that replaces the absolute "can't" with "is detected and rejected"); locate the sentence referencing "ops.json" and "migration.ts" and replace the phrase accordingly.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@apps/blog/content/blog/data-migrations-in-prisma-next/index.mdx`:
- Line 22: The sentence describing adding a displayName column to User in
contract.prisma is a run-on/comma splice; split it into two sentences for
clarity—one stating that you added a displayName column to User in
contract.prisma and want to make it NOT NULL, and a second stating the snag that
existing rows lack displayName so making the column NOT NULL fails because
existing rows violate the constraint; update the paragraph referencing
displayName, User, and contract.prisma accordingly.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@apps/blog/content/blog/data-migrations-in-prisma-next/index.mdx`:
- Around line 157-158: The sentence claiming an agent "can't tweak the SQL
behind your back" is too absolute—update the sentence that mentions ops.json and
migration.ts to a precise, testable claim such as: ops.json is signed against
the migration.ts it came from so tampering with the generated SQL is detectable
and a mismatched signature causes the migration to be rejected (or similar
wording that replaces the absolute "can't" with "is detected and rejected");
locate the sentence referencing "ops.json" and "migration.ts" and replace the
phrase accordingly.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 0cc41ddc-14fd-4397-af77-a71e34d4eea1
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
apps/blog/public/data-migrations-in-prisma-next/imgs/hero.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgapps/blog/public/data-migrations-in-prisma-next/imgs/meta.pngis excluded by!**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
apps/blog/content/blog/data-migrations-in-prisma-next/index.mdx
Summary by CodeRabbit