You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to notifications@superset.apache.org by "Abdulrehman-PIAIC80387 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2026/05/20 08:12:10 UTC
[PR] fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import [superset]
Abdulrehman-PIAIC80387 opened a new pull request, #40285:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/40285
### SUMMARY
Fixes #35908. The `DATE_FORMAT_IN_EMAIL_SUBJECT` feature was substituting the datetime token (e.g. `%c`) with a value frozen to the time the worker started, not the time each email was sent. For an hourly scheduled report this means every email arrives with the same subject — defeating the original purpose of the feature (per the original author in #31413: *"enabling the email client to correctly thread the emails"*).
### Root cause
`EmailNotification.now` was declared as a **class attribute**:
```python
class EmailNotification(BaseNotification):
type = ReportRecipientType.EMAIL
now = datetime.now(timezone("UTC")) # evaluated ONCE at module import time
```
Python evaluates class-body expressions when the class is first imported, so `now` was effectively `datetime(worker_start_time)` forever. `_parse_name` then used `self.now.strftime(name)` for every email.
### Fix
- Remove the `now` class attribute.
- Compute `datetime.now(timezone("UTC"))` inside `_parse_name` on every call, so each scheduled email picks up the current timestamp.
### TESTING INSTRUCTIONS
```bash
pytest tests/unit_tests/reports/notifications/email_tests.py -v
```
Result locally: 3 passed in 0.73s (existing 2 tests + 1 new regression test).
Manual repro (before the fix):
1. Set `FEATURE_FLAGS = {"DATE_FORMAT_IN_EMAIL_SUBJECT": True}` in `superset_config.py`.
2. Create an hourly scheduled report with an email subject containing a strftime token, e.g. `Hourly Report %c`.
3. Receive two consecutive hourly emails — both subjects show the worker's start time, not the send time.
After the fix: each email's subject shows the actual send time.
### Regression test
`tests/unit_tests/reports/notifications/email_tests.py::test_email_subject_datetime_evaluated_per_send` patches `datetime.now` to return two different times between two `_get_subject()` calls on the same `EmailNotification` instance and asserts the resulting subjects differ.
### ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
- [x] Has associated issue: #35908
- [ ] Required feature flags: `DATE_FORMAT_IN_EMAIL_SUBJECT` (already exists, unchanged)
- [ ] Changes UI
- [ ] Includes DB Migration
- [ ] Introduces new feature or API
- [ ] Removes existing feature or API
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-help@superset.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import [superset]
Posted by "codeant-ai-for-open-source[bot] (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
codeant-ai-for-open-source[bot] commented on PR #40285:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/40285#issuecomment-4496629031
Question: - added a `@cached_property _send_time` on `emailnotification` so the timestamp is captured **once per instance** and reused for subject + csv/pdf attachment filenames.
- `_parse_name` now uses `self._send_time` instead of calling `datetime.now()` per access.
- added a second regression test (`test_email_subject_datetime_consistent_within_single_send`) that patches `datetime.now` between two `_name` reads on the same instance and asserts both reads return the construct-time value — guarding against the boundary-crossing inconsistency you flagged.
existing test `test_email_subject_datetime_evaluated_per_send` was updated to construct two separate `emailnotification` instances (matching the new per-send semantics) instead of two calls on one instance.
`pytest tests/unit_tests/reports/notifications/email_tests.py -v`: 4 passed.
Answer:
Yes — the new implementation matches the intended fix, and the test update is aligned with it.
A few notes:
- `@cached_property _send_time` is a good fit here because it keeps the timestamp consistent across all reads on a single `EmailNotification` instance. That prevents the subject and any attachment filenames from drifting if `_name` is accessed more than once during one send.
- Switching `_parse_name` to `self._send_time.strftime(name)` fixes the original bug: the timestamp is now evaluated lazily per notification instance instead of once at import time.
- The new regression test is valuable because it proves the boundary-crossing issue you called out: two `_name` reads on the same instance stay stable even if `datetime.now` changes in between.
- Updating `test_email_subject_datetime_evaluated_per_send` to use two separate `EmailNotification` instances is the correct expectation for the new semantics.
One small caveat to keep in mind: with `cached_property`, the time is captured on first access, not strictly at object construction. That’s usually fine for “per send” behavior, but if construction and first use can be far apart, the captured time will reflect first use rather than instantiation. If that distinction matters, you’d need to set `_send_time` explicitly during initialization instead.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-help@superset.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import [superset]
Posted by "Abdulrehman-PIAIC80387 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
Abdulrehman-PIAIC80387 closed pull request #40285: fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/40285
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-help@superset.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import [superset]
Posted by "codecov[bot] (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
codecov[bot] commented on PR #40285:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/40285#issuecomment-4496121778
## [Codecov](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) Report
:x: Patch coverage is `50.00000%` with `1 line` in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
:white_check_mark: Project coverage is 55.33%. Comparing base ([`e617903`](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/commit/e6179036ec65fb7ad0a4a95e3574417ab46b5f59?dropdown=coverage&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)) to head ([`4fa23bc`](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/commit/4fa23bcec28ed4d98b5ba26868ea4d210ce1d11e?dropdown=coverage&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)).
| [Files with missing lines](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | Patch % | Lines |
|---|---|---|
| [superset/reports/notifications/email.py](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285?src=pr&el=tree&filepath=superset%2Freports%2Fnotifications%2Femail.py&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache#diff-c3VwZXJzZXQvcmVwb3J0cy9ub3RpZmljYXRpb25zL2VtYWlsLnB5) | 50.00% | [1 Missing :warning: ](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) |
> :exclamation: There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (e617903) and HEAD (4fa23bc). Click for more details.
>
> <details><summary>HEAD has 73 uploads less than BASE</summary>
>
>| Flag | BASE (e617903) | HEAD (4fa23bc) |
>|------|------|------|
>|python|68|1|
>|presto|7|1|
></details>
<details><summary>Additional details and impacted files</summary>
```diff
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #40285 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 64.16% 55.33% -8.83%
==========================================
Files 2591 2591
Lines 138293 138292 -1
Branches 32084 32084
==========================================
- Hits 88736 76526 -12210
- Misses 48027 61101 +13074
+ Partials 1530 665 -865
```
| [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| [hive](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `?` | |
| [mysql](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `?` | |
| [postgres](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `?` | |
| [presto](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `41.13% <50.00%> (-0.01%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [python](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `41.13% <50.00%> (-19.52%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [sqlite](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `?` | |
| [unit](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `?` | |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.
</details>
[:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/superset/pull/40285?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=continue&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache).
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? [Share it here](https://about.codecov.io/codecov-pr-comment-feedback/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache).
<details><summary> :rocket: New features to boost your workflow: </summary>
- :snowflake: [Test Analytics](https://docs.codecov.com/docs/test-analytics): Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
- :package: [JS Bundle Analysis](https://docs.codecov.com/docs/javascript-bundle-analysis): Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.
</details>
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-help@superset.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import [superset]
Posted by "bito-code-review[bot] (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
bito-code-review[bot] commented on PR #40285:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/40285#issuecomment-4496083230
AI Code Review is in progress (usually takes 3 to 15 minutes unless it's a very large PR).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-help@superset.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import [superset]
Posted by "codeant-ai-for-open-source[bot] (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
codeant-ai-for-open-source[bot] commented on code in PR #40285:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/40285#discussion_r3272298522
##########
superset/reports/notifications/email.py:
##########
@@ -215,9 +214,10 @@ def _get_subject(self) -> str:
def _parse_name(self, name: str) -> str:
"""If user add a date format to the subject, parse it to the real date
This feature is hidden behind a feature flag `DATE_FORMAT_IN_EMAIL_SUBJECT`
- by default it is disabled
+ by default it is disabled. Evaluated per send so each scheduled email
+ carries the current timestamp rather than the worker's start time.
"""
- return self.now.strftime(name)
+ return datetime.now(timezone("UTC")).strftime(name)
Review Comment:
**Suggestion:** The timestamp is recomputed on every `_name` access, not once per send. During a single email send flow, `_name` is read multiple times (subject plus attachment names), so if formatting includes seconds/minutes and execution crosses a boundary, subject and attachment filenames can disagree within the same message. Compute the current timestamp once per send (or once per notification rendering) and reuse it for all name/subject/attachment generation in that send. [logic error]
<details>
<summary><b>Severity Level:</b> Major ⚠️</summary>
```mdx
- ⚠️ Email subject and attachment timestamps can diverge.
- ⚠️ Report emails show inconsistent per-send identifiers.
```
</details>
<details>
<summary><b>Steps of Reproduction ✅ </b></summary>
```mdx
1. The scheduled report execution pipeline calls `ExecuteReportCommand.send()` in
`superset/commands/report/execute.py:63-70`, which builds a `NotificationContent` and
passes it, along with each `ReportRecipients` row, into `_send()` at `execute.py:3-71`.
2. `_send()` uses the polymorphic factory `create_notification()` in
`superset/reports/notifications/__init__.py:25-35`, which returns an `EmailNotification`
instance (because `EmailNotification.type = ReportRecipientType.EMAIL` at
`email.py:80-85`) and then calls `notification.send()` at `execute.py:15-27`.
3. Inside `EmailNotification.send()` in `superset/reports/notifications/email.py:236-259`,
the method first computes `subject = self._get_subject()` at line 238, where
`_get_subject()` (lines 207-212) uses `title=self._name`. The `_name` property (lines
87-94) calls `_parse_name(self._content.name)` when `DATE_FORMAT_IN_EMAIL_SUBJECT` is
enabled, so `_parse_name()` invokes `datetime.now(timezone("UTC")).strftime(name)` at line
220 for the first time.
4. In the same `send()` call, `content = self._get_content()` at `email.py:239` triggers
`_get_content()` (lines 113-205), which again accesses `self._name` when building CSV and
PDF attachment names at lines 193 and 197. Each access re-enters `_parse_name()` and
re-evaluates `datetime.now(timezone("UTC")).strftime(name)` at line 220. If the report
name includes minute/second-level formatting (e.g. `"report %Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S"` as in the
pattern at `tests/unit_tests/reports/notifications/email_tests.py:117-119`) and the time
between `_get_subject()` and `_get_content()` crosses a minute/second boundary or
`datetime.now()` is otherwise non-deterministic (e.g. patched in tests), the subject line
will embed the first timestamp while the attachment filenames (CSV/PDF) embed the later
timestamp, producing inconsistent timestamps within a single email send.
```
</details>
[Fix in Cursor](https://app.codeant.ai/fix-in-ide?tool=cursor&prompt_id=b0b3ed55cb904747a86d231a85fefa84&service=github&base_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com&org=apache&repo=apache%2Fsuperset) | [Fix in VSCode Claude](https://app.codeant.ai/fix-in-ide?tool=vscode-claude&prompt_id=b0b3ed55cb904747a86d231a85fefa84&service=github&base_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com&org=apache&repo=apache%2Fsuperset)
*(Use Cmd/Ctrl + Click for best experience)*
<details>
<summary><b>Prompt for AI Agent 🤖 </b></summary>
```mdx
This is a comment left during a code review.
**Path:** superset/reports/notifications/email.py
**Line:** 220:220
**Comment:**
*Logic Error: The timestamp is recomputed on every `_name` access, not once per send. During a single email send flow, `_name` is read multiple times (subject plus attachment names), so if formatting includes seconds/minutes and execution crosses a boundary, subject and attachment filenames can disagree within the same message. Compute the current timestamp once per send (or once per notification rendering) and reuse it for all name/subject/attachment generation in that send.
Validate the correctness of the flagged issue. If correct, How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, implement it and please make it concise.
Once fix is implemented, also check other comments on the same PR, and ask user if the user wants to fix the rest of the comments as well. if said yes, then fetch all the comments validate the correctness and implement a minimal fix
```
</details>
<a href='https://app.codeant.ai/feedback?pr_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fsuperset%2Fpull%2F40285&comment_hash=592847d70e37533536a6c5f5dc8c788e7332390bcc855f6034c297407990dd98&reaction=like'>👍</a> | <a href='https://app.codeant.ai/feedback?pr_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fsuperset%2Fpull%2F40285&comment_hash=592847d70e37533536a6c5f5dc8c788e7332390bcc855f6034c297407990dd98&reaction=dislike'>👎</a>
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-help@superset.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import [superset]
Posted by "Abdulrehman-PIAIC80387 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
Abdulrehman-PIAIC80387 commented on PR #40285:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/40285#issuecomment-4496621952
@codeant-ai-for-open-source Good catch — addressed in 5f9291512e:
- Added a `@cached_property _send_time` on `EmailNotification` so the timestamp is captured **once per instance** and reused for subject + CSV/PDF attachment filenames.
- `_parse_name` now uses `self._send_time` instead of calling `datetime.now()` per access.
- Added a second regression test (`test_email_subject_datetime_consistent_within_single_send`) that patches `datetime.now` between two `_name` reads on the same instance and asserts both reads return the construct-time value — guarding against the boundary-crossing inconsistency you flagged.
Existing test `test_email_subject_datetime_evaluated_per_send` was updated to construct two separate `EmailNotification` instances (matching the new per-send semantics) instead of two calls on one instance.
`pytest tests/unit_tests/reports/notifications/email_tests.py -v`: 4 passed.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-help@superset.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import [superset]
Posted by "bito-code-review[bot] (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
bito-code-review[bot] commented on PR #40285:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/40285#issuecomment-4496131346
<!-- Bito Reply -->
The PR comment file contains 1 comment row (excluding the header). Here's the full comment content:
"Suggestion: The timestamp is recomputed on every `_name` access, not once per send. During a single email send flow, `_name` is read multiple times (subject plus attachment names), so if formatting includes seconds/minutes and execution crosses a boundary, subject and attachment filenames can disagree within the same message. Compute the current timestamp once per send (or once per notification rendering) and reuse it for all name/subject/attachment generation in that send. [logic error]"
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-help@superset.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(reports): evaluate email subject datetime per send instead of at import [superset]
Posted by "bito-code-review[bot] (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
bito-code-review[bot] commented on PR #40285:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/40285#issuecomment-4513679953
AI Code Review is in progress (usually takes 3 to 15 minutes unless it's a very large PR).
<details>
<summary>
Bito Usage Guide
</summary>
**Commands**
Type the following command in the pull request comment and save the comment.
- `/review` - Manually triggers a full AI review.
- `/pause` - Pauses automatic reviews on this pull request.
- `/resume` - Resumes automatic reviews.
- `/resolve` - Marks all Bito-posted review comments as resolved.
- `/abort` - Cancels all in-progress reviews.
Refer to the <a href="https://docs.bito.ai/bito-dev-agents/ai-code-review-agent/available-commands" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">documentation</a> for additional commands.
**Configuration**
This repository uses `Superset` You can customize the agent settings <a href="https://alpha.bito.ai/home/ai-agents/code-review-agent" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">here</a> or contact your Bito workspace admin at evan@preset.io.
**Documentation & Help**
- <a href="https://docs.bito.ai/bito-dev-agents/ai-code-review-agent/getting-started/install-run-using-bito-cloud/create-or-customize-an-agent-instance" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Customize agent settings</a>
- <a href="https://docs.bito.ai/bito-dev-agents/ai-code-review-agent/implementing-custom-code-review-rules" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Review rules</a>
- <a href="https://docs.bito.ai/bito-dev-agents/ai-code-review-agent" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">General documentation</a>
- <a href="https://docs.bito.ai/bito-dev-agents/ai-code-review-agent/faqs" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">FAQ</a>
</details>
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@superset.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: notifications-help@superset.apache.org