Read database access keys through one shared helper - #1542
Merged
Conversation
Closes #1500 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YJDy3qA1LyNTh11zS98ukM
adamtheturtle
force-pushed
the
adamtheturtle/vws-web-tools-issue-1500
branch
from
August 27, 2026 08:05
6f53c1b to
d2d6054
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #1500.
The "two grey boxes per key section" assumption was written out three times — twice in
get_database_detailsand once inget_vumark_database_details— each as a wait spelling the rule one way, followed some lines later by[0]and[1]spelling it another, with a locally-scopedexpected_key_boxesin between. Nothing tied the wait to the indexing except reading both._wait_for_access_keysand_access_key_pairnow hold that rule in one place, and_access_key_pair's docstring states the precondition it depends on and that boxes past the first two are ignored, so adding a third does not silently change what comes back.To be accurate about the reported symptom: an
IndexErroris not reachable today. The wait requires at least two filled boxes before either function indexes anything, so a section with fewer raisesTimeoutException— andget_database_detailsis wrapped in the tenacity retry, which retries exactly that. What was wrong is that the invariant was duplicated and separated from its use, not that it could be violated.No behaviour change, so no newsfragment.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01YJDy3qA1LyNTh11zS98ukM