Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

consider devices which have been off for more than 7 days #3697

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 19, 2024

Conversation

Baalmart
Copy link
Contributor

@Baalmart Baalmart commented Oct 19, 2024

Description

During uptime checks, consider devices which have been off for more than 7 days

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes

    • Updated the uptime check threshold to 168 hours, enhancing device monitoring accuracy.
  • Chores

    • Adjusted internal logic for filtering devices based on their last refreshed time.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 19, 2024

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD constant in the src/device-registry/models/Event.js file, changing its value from 48 to 168 hours. This adjustment impacts the filterNullAndReportOffDevices function, which utilizes this threshold to assess whether a device's last refreshed time exceeds the limit. The function will now log messages based on this new threshold, but no other structural changes were made to the schema or methods.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
src/device-registry/models/Event.js Updated UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD from 48 to 168

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • BenjaminSsempala

🎉 In the realm of code, a threshold we raise,
From forty-eight hours to one hundred sixty-eight days.
Devices now linger, their status we check,
Reporting their uptime, what the heck!
With logs that now echo, our logic refined,
In the world of devices, new paths we find! 🚀


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 19, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 11.62%. Comparing base (958546f) to head (9e5f694).
Report is 2 commits behind head on staging.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           staging    #3697   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    11.62%   11.62%           
========================================
  Files          107      107           
  Lines        14885    14885           
  Branches       274      274           
========================================
  Hits          1730     1730           
  Misses       13155    13155           
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/device-registry/models/Event.js 6.81% <100.00%> (ø)

Copy link
Contributor

Device registry changes in this PR available for preview here

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/device-registry/models/Event.js (2)

24-24: Approved: UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD update aligns with PR objective.

The change from 48 to 168 hours (7 days) for the UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD constant aligns well with the PR objective to consider devices that have been off for more than 7 days. This adjustment will affect the frequency of uptime alerts and overall system behavior.

Consider adding a comment explaining the rationale behind this 7-day threshold, which could be helpful for future maintenance.


Inconsistent Uptime Threshold Constants Detected

It appears that both UPTIME_THRESHOLD and UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD are used within the codebase with different values:

  • UPTIME_THRESHOLD:
    • src/device-registry/utils/scripts/downtime-report.js: 48
    • src/device-registry/bin/jobs/v2-check-network-status-job.js: 50
  • UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD:
    • src/device-registry/models/Event.js: 168

This inconsistency can lead to confusion and potential bugs. It's recommended to:

  • Consolidate these constants into a single UPTIME_THRESHOLD to maintain consistency across the codebase.
  • Update all references to ensure they use the unified constant.
  • Document the chosen threshold value and its purpose clearly.
🔗 Analysis chain

Line range hint 1004-1048: Consider the implications of the increased UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD on logging frequency.

The filterNullAndReportOffDevices function now uses the increased UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD of 168 hours (7 days). This change will result in:

  1. Less frequent logging of "off" devices, as the threshold has been extended from 2 to 7 days.
  2. Potential reduction in the volume of logs generated.
  3. Delayed detection of devices that have gone offline, which might be intentional based on the PR objective.

Consider adding a comment in this function to explain the 7-day threshold and its implications on device monitoring.

To ensure this change doesn't adversely affect the system's ability to monitor device status, we should verify the impact on log volume and device status tracking. Here's a script to check the current log patterns:

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check the current log patterns for device uptime alerts

# Search for log entries related to device uptime
rg "Last refreshed time difference exceeds" --type js

Length of output: 97


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check the current log patterns for device uptime alerts in JavaScript files

# Search for log entries related to device uptime in JavaScript files
rg "Last refreshed time difference exceeds" --type js

Length of output: 511


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find definitions of UPTIME_THRESHOLD and UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD across the codebase

# Search for definition of UPTIME_THRESHOLD
rg "const\s+UPTIME_THRESHOLD\s*=" --type js

# Search for definition of UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD
rg "const\s+UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD\s*=" --type js

Length of output: 340

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 958546f and 9e5f694.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/device-registry/models/Event.js (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/device-registry/models/Event.js (1)

24-24: Verify the system-wide impact of the UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD change.

While the UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD constant is only directly used in the filterNullAndReportOffDevices function, the implications of this change from 2 days to 7 days might affect other parts of the system that rely on the uptime check results.

To ensure this change doesn't have unintended consequences, please verify:

  1. Any dashboards or reports that display device uptime statistics.
  2. Any alerts or notifications systems that might be triggered by device downtime.
  3. Any data analysis or machine learning models that use device uptime as a feature.

Here's a script to help identify potential areas affected by this change:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Identify potential areas affected by UPTIME_CHECK_THRESHOLD change

# Search for files that might be using the results of uptime checks
rg -t js -t python "device.*uptime|uptime.*check|device.*status"

@Baalmart Baalmart merged commit 42690b3 into staging Oct 19, 2024
50 checks passed
@Baalmart Baalmart deleted the chore-uptime-checks branch October 19, 2024 22:04
@Baalmart Baalmart mentioned this pull request Oct 19, 2024
1 task
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant