Feat/invoice line details calculations #1834
Conversation
turip
force-pushed
the
feat/invoice-line-details-calculations
branch
from
448fadb
to
b617e83
Compare
| @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ var ( | |||
| ErrInvoiceActionNotAvailable = NewValidationError("invoice_action_not_available", "invoice action not available") | |||
|
|
|||
| ErrInvoiceLineFeatureHasNoMeters = NewValidationError("invoice_line_feature_has_no_meters", "usage based invoice line: feature has no meters") | |||
| ErrInvoiceLineGraduatedSplitNotSupported = NewValidationError("invoice_line_graduated_split_not_supported", "graduated tiered pricing is not supported for split periods") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should be registered in httpdriver
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All of these are wrapped into ValidationErrors or whatever error it should be reported as, and that is the thing that the HTTP driver handles.
I can only add a fallback, but regardless the previous logic should ensure proper error codes.
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Technically this should not happen, as the last tier should have an upper limit of infinity |
| // As entgo doesn't support conditional unique indexes, defaults to ID of the | ||
| // line. | ||
| // TODO: add hooks | ||
| field.String("child_unique_reference_id"). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See apps:
index.Fields("namespace", "type", "is_default").
Annotations(
entsql.IndexWhere("is_default = true"),
).
Unique(),
| expect: newDetailedLinesInput{ | ||
| { | ||
| Name: "feature: usage in period", | ||
| Amount: alpacadecimal.NewFromFloat(10), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, there was 10 usage, at 10/unit price.
The amount here reflects the unit price. We should rename it to Unit Price. But on a line level this is always per unit amount.
Once the calculations are done there will be a few more fields, such as Sum (Qty * UnitPrice, currency rounding), Total for line total different line total value, most probably based on this: https://docs.gobl.org/draft-0/bill/line
| UpToAmount: lo.ToPtr(alpacadecimal.NewFromFloat(5)), | ||
| FlatPrice: &plan.PriceTierFlatPrice{ | ||
| // 20/unit | ||
| Amount: alpacadecimal.NewFromFloat(100), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tiered pricing means units prices on amount see:
https://openmeter.io/blog/tiered-pricing-model#example-comparison
So the unit price will be $100 for for the first 5 items not $20
| }), | ||
| lineMode: lastInPeriodSplitLineMode, | ||
| usage: featureUsageResponse{ | ||
| LinePeriodQty: alpacadecimal.NewFromFloat(100), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think a test with 14 and 15 qty would be more useful
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func TestTieredVolumeCalculation(t *testing.T) { | ||
| testTiers := []plan.PriceTier{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On volume based each unit is billed on the highest achieved discount, see:
https://openmeter.io/blog/tiered-pricing-model#example-comparison
| usage: featureUsageResponse{ | ||
| LinePeriodQty: alpacadecimal.NewFromFloat(22), | ||
| }, | ||
| expect: newDetailedLinesInput{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
on qty 22 we should have only one line item on the highest discount, see:
https://openmeter.io/blog/tiered-pricing-model#example-comparison
Overview
Fixes #(issue)
Notes for reviewer