Added testing note

[cwarnermm]

Docs to-do: Add updated note to specific user count levels as needed

[github-actions]

Newest code from mattermost has been published to preview environment for Git SHA e38d5fc

[agarciamontoro]

This looks great from a technical point of view. But I'd love to get the PM point of view as well before merging, if that's possible. cc/@wiersgallak

[sadohert]

Hey All... just reviewed the note. Good we caught that.

I think we need to add something else here.

When I read this:

the Elasticsearch cluster is underspecified for user counts of 30k users or more

I immediately wonder "Okay, so what should it be for those customers?" The "overspecified" case doesn't concern me really. Its the Elasticsearch underspecified.

In the absence of bandwidth to gather data-driven values for these variables, can we adapt the specifications recommended for ES >=30k to something we would consider "borderline OVERspecified", then our "Important Note" would read more like:

Hey, these were not analyzed deeply in the scope of testing for this round. Its possible lower instance specs will be sufficient. We recommend monitoring the performance of the Elasticsearch cluster to identify opportunities for reduced specifications.

[cwarnermm]

@agarciamontoro - Can I get your help incorporating @sadohert's input into the note details, please? I'll ensure the note displays on applicable pages in the scale section.

[agarciamontoro]

I'm onboard with Stu's idea, but coming up with such a specification without testing is... scary. Let's discuss this next week, I self-requested a review so I don't forget :)