[NoQA] feat: add sample Sidebar performance test by ArekChr · Pull Request #19374 · Expensify/App

ArekChr · 2023-05-22T12:57:17Z

Details

This pull request introduces a configuration for regression tests and uses a new customized workflow to validate reassure reports. The aim is to determine whether a test should fail or pass based on specific validation requirements.

The current validation requirements are as follows:

Render counts deviation 0. If the render count increases by 1, the validation will not pass.
Render duration deviation of 20%. For example, if the duration of rendering a component increases from 1 second to 1.21 seconds, the validation will not pass.
It's important to note that this PR does not alter the application logic. Therefore there is no need for screenshots of the changes.

Implementation of workflow validation: #20349

Fixed Issues

Partially #19376

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
Verify that reassure tests passes

Offline tests

no offline tests needed

QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
Verify that reassure tests passes

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Web

Mobile Web - Chrome

Mobile Web - Safari

Desktop

iOS

Android

melvin-bot · 2023-05-22T12:57:53Z

@techievivek Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

ArekChr · 2023-05-29T12:34:19Z

@mountiny, Could you request someone for CI actions review?

mountiny

@ArekChr small nitpicks

mountiny · 2023-05-30T07:20:32Z

Will the danger action fail now until we merge this to main? https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/5112617083/jobs/9190877313?pr=19374

ArekChr · 2023-05-30T07:33:32Z

Will the danger action fail now until we merge this to main? https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/5112617083/jobs/9190877313?pr=19374

No, it should succeed. I'm investigating that

ArekChr · 2023-05-30T07:51:41Z

@mountiny I checked that. You're right. We need to have the .reassure dir with the first report in the main branch to get the comparison working correctly.

The error message not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git confuses me.

mountiny · 2023-05-30T07:58:57Z

@ArekChr Do you want to make a new PR which we can merge first with the necessary changes to make sure we can run the Reassure and pass in this PR?

ArekChr · 2023-05-30T08:02:27Z

@ArekChr Do you want to make a new PR which we can merge first with the necessary changes to make sure we can run the Reassure and pass in this PR?

Yes, please do. We will need to add almost all these changes from this PR.

mountiny · 2023-05-30T08:11:18Z

@ArekChr Oh can you make that new PR please and link the same issue? :D

ArekChr · 2023-05-30T08:25:49Z

@mountiny We can do that slightly differently as well. I can create a test comparison branch as a BASELINE instead of merging with the main. I will do that

mountiny · 2023-05-30T08:28:09Z

@ArekChr Hmm I think using main makes sense. Would you always just keep the test branch in sync with main? Why not use main in this case :D

ArekChr · 2023-05-30T08:30:31Z

Just for testing purposes to ensure everything works properly before merging it into the main branch

mountiny · 2023-05-30T08:51:05Z

@ArekChr Alright, thanks for clarifying, feel free to go ahead :)

ArekChr · 2023-05-30T10:44:07Z

Hey, @mountiny, I made some progress. Created reassure with the minimal setup PR

Here is the tested GH action script on my fork

Next steps: Merge baseline and get OSBofity to work to prepare a regression report.

mountiny · 2023-05-30T11:08:19Z

@ArekChr Merged the baseline PR

ArekChr · 2023-05-31T13:53:08Z

@mountiny I think the reassurePerformanceTests workflow requires access to the OS_BOTIFY_TOKEN secret to getting it up and running. Please help me with that when you get a moment

mountiny · 2023-06-01T10:58:11Z

Lets try the actions for commenting we have in other workflows

@ArekChr also can you please revert here the danger setup we added in this PR #19811 ? Thanks!

ArekChr · 2023-06-01T10:59:14Z

Lets try the actions for commenting we have in other workflows

@ArekChr also can you please revert here the danger setup we added in this PR #19811 ? Thanks!

Yes sure, working on that

ArekChr · 2023-06-01T11:55:11Z

@mountiny Danger reverted in this PR
I have reused create comment action, but the workflow still doesn't have permission to OS_BOTIFY_TOKEN. Details

mountiny · 2023-06-01T13:45:07Z

@ArekChr Thanks, can you merge main now, I have merged the revert

mountiny · 2023-06-01T14:22:39Z

I will create the PR from my branch as the token does not work from your from your fork

mountiny

thank you @ArekChr

mountiny · 2023-06-07T17:38:56Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android / native
- Android / Chrome
- iOS / native
- iOS / Safari
- MacOS / Chrome / Safari
- MacOS / Desktop
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
- I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(themeColors.componentBG)
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

No need for recordings as its only CI change

Web

Mobile Web - Chrome

Mobile Web - Safari

Desktop

iOS

Android

mountiny

Thank you Arek, great job

AndrewGable · 2023-06-07T17:44:31Z

+on:
+  push:
+    branches: [main]
+  pull_request:
+    branches: ['**']


I think we should do:

on: pull_request: types: [opened, synchronize] branches-ignore: [staging, production]

We do not want to run on those branches as they are used in the deploy process.

OSBotify · 2023-06-07T18:23:48Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

roryabraham · 2023-06-07T22:47:42Z

Heads up: this broke our deploy process because the checks were running on OSBotify's automated PRs and the workflow timed out waiting for them to finish

mountiny · 2023-06-08T12:20:49Z

Thanks for help, addressed these in a follow up PRs

OSBotify · 2023-06-08T17:02:15Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.26-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

OSBotify · 2023-06-13T00:22:57Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/AndrewGable in version: 1.3.26-4 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

ArekChr requested a review from a team as a code owner May 22, 2023 12:57

melvin-bot Bot requested review from techievivek and removed request for a team May 22, 2023 12:57

mountiny assigned ArekChr May 22, 2023

mountiny self-requested a review May 22, 2023 13:16

mountiny reviewed May 30, 2023

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .github/workflows/reassurePerformanceTests.yml Outdated

Comment thread .gitignore Outdated

ArekChr mentioned this pull request May 30, 2023

[NoQA] feat: reassure minimal setup #19811

Merged

61 tasks

ArekChr mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2023

[NoQA] refactor: revert danger #19948

Merged

57 tasks

mountiny reviewed Jun 1, 2023

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .github/workflows/reassurePerformanceTests.yml Outdated

Comment thread .github/workflows/reassurePerformanceTests.yml Outdated

mountiny reviewed Jun 1, 2023

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .github/workflows/reassurePerformanceTests.yml Outdated

ArekChr added 12 commits June 7, 2023 13:07

test: regression

daaea2d

feat: add reassure validation gh workflow action

2a4d656

fix: remove underscore import

b38b0b6

fix: prettier

27572fa

fix: build actions

d0e6323

feat: add logging

c70692b

refactor: improve logging

cc234bb

fix: build action

809437d

fix: count deviation condition, remove pr comment

430bef1

fix: remove regression

02ff8ee

fix: prettier

01b0522

fix: use report validation worflow from upstream

2dc94ab

mountiny reviewed Jun 7, 2023

View reviewed changes

Comment thread tests/perf-test/SidebarLinks.perf-test.js Outdated

fix: remove react import

1acf6ad

mountiny previously approved these changes Jun 7, 2023

View reviewed changes

mountiny reviewed Jun 7, 2023

View reviewed changes

Comment thread package-lock.json

revert: package lock

e89ac6e

ArekChr dismissed mountiny’s stale review via e89ac6e June 7, 2023 16:12

mountiny approved these changes Jun 7, 2023

View reviewed changes

mountiny changed the title ~~feat: add sample Sidebar performance test~~ [NoQA] feat: add sample Sidebar performance test Jun 7, 2023

mountiny merged commit 49895f4 into Expensify:main Jun 7, 2023

AndrewGable self-requested a review June 7, 2023 17:41

AndrewGable reviewed Jun 7, 2023

View reviewed changes

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jun 8, 2023

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2023-06-08 #20466

Closed

74 tasks

Uh oh!

Conversation

ArekChr commented May 22, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented May 22, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented May 29, 2023

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mountiny commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented May 30, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mountiny commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

mountiny commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

mountiny commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

mountiny commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented May 30, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mountiny commented May 30, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented May 31, 2023

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jun 1, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented Jun 1, 2023

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented Jun 1, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jun 1, 2023

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jun 1, 2023

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jun 7, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AndrewGable Jun 7, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ArekChr commented May 22, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ArekChr commented May 30, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ArekChr commented May 30, 2023 •

edited

Loading

ArekChr commented Jun 1, 2023 •

edited

Loading

mountiny commented Jun 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading

AndrewGable Jun 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading