[NoQA] feat: chat TTI by kirillzyusko · Pull Request #39394 · Expensify/App

kirillzyusko · 2024-04-02T10:03:20Z

Details

Added Chat TTI metric:

{
    'Chat opening': [
      364.42500799894333,  971.0976159870625,
      1022.3185229897499,  982.3613690137863,
       999.4865730106831,   887.573323994875,
       979.0697430074215, 1010.2117110192776,
      1032.6744799911976,  921.7213949859142,
       981.4588629901409, 1158.6486819982529,
       945.6628830134869, 1176.0617680251598,
      1052.8429770171642, 1118.5135499835014,
      1033.7156990170479
    ],
    'Chat TTI': [
        5074.55298101902, 1790.0745859742165,
      2051.2563489973545, 2005.0043540000916,
      1998.7331549823284, 1866.3199880123138,
      1889.6545830070972, 2032.6024180054665,
      2021.3704849779606, 1968.0362559854984,
       1953.295248001814, 2143.3363049924374,
      1900.3940030038357, 2204.9531259834766,
      2105.7273360192776, 2345.3342700004578,
       2110.460002988577
    ]
  }

And running a test:

➡️  Meaningless changes to duration
 - Chat opening: 1017.089 ms → 1017.089 ms 
 - Chat TTI: 2024.160 ms → 2024.160 ms

Fixed Issues

$ #34494
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

run ChatOpening tests
check that new metric is present and has valid values
Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

run ChatOpening tests
check that new metric is present and has valid values
Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2024-04-02T12:57:05Z

@Pujan92 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]

kirillzyusko · 2024-04-02T12:58:45Z

I've added new mark for tracking - it should reflect a real TTI 👀

One question is open though - do we want to track CPU usage during our interactions as well?

@rinej may I ask you to review these changes?

cc @adamgrzybowski @mountiny

mountiny

Changes look good to me, anything you need to clarify here still?

kirillzyusko · 2024-04-04T09:30:36Z

Changes look good to me, anything you need to clarify here still?

@mountiny Maybe additional review from @rinej or @adamgrzybowski 👀

adhorodyski · 2024-04-05T09:06:32Z

Code wise this looks good, results are also realistic - @kirillzyusko @mountiny up to us what scale AND style of an account we want to aim for (maybe @quinthar 's?). This may bring the numbers up a lot, 2s might become stable for a long time so it can get hard to see the improvements (2s -> 0.5s is harder to achieve now for everyone than 5s/10s+ -> 2s for a hard case scenario).

[nit] One additional comment I might have is the wording, is it possible that we align it between all of the places? That's for the consistency, Chat TTI was not exactly in the initial set of metrics. Will Report screen load time work? We can even adjust this the other way around, my only point is to fully align it across all the test/monitoring suites to avoid any confusion later down the road.

mountiny · 2024-04-05T12:32:20Z

Sounds good @kirillzyusko @chrispader could we update the variables and logs to not refer chat TTI but use the Report screen load time language? thanks!

kirillzyusko · 2024-04-05T22:05:08Z

@adhorodyski we already have Chat opening metric and Report screen load time sounds very similar to me (the only difference between them is that first is measuring only loading of the chat screen while the other is measuring full cycle from a chat selection till new screen becomes responsive).

Do you think we should rename Chat opening as well? What would be the better name then?

mountiny · 2024-04-09T13:58:58Z

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: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb 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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- 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(theme.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 the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
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

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

mountiny · 2024-04-09T13:59:38Z

I am just going to go ahead with this one, we can discuss renaming potentially later

OSBotify · 2024-04-10T17:46:18Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.62-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-04-10T17:55:11Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.62-0 🚀

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

kavimuru · 2024-04-10T18:06:16Z

@kirillzyusko how do QA team validate the step ?

check that new metric is present and has valid values

Could you please share the QA steps?

OSBotify · 2024-04-10T19:34:24Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.62-0 🚀

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

kavimuru · 2024-04-11T12:19:28Z

@mountiny @kirillzyusko could you help with this #39394 (comment)?

mountiny · 2024-04-15T18:20:15Z

No QA here, sorry

OSBotify · 2024-04-18T04:32:09Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.62-17 🚀

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

feat: chat TTI

8887c99

kirillzyusko marked this pull request as ready for review April 2, 2024 12:57

kirillzyusko requested a review from a team as a code owner April 2, 2024 12:57

melvin-bot Bot requested review from Pujan92 and removed request for a team April 2, 2024 12:57

refactor: move utility to separate file

4b8e5f3

mountiny assigned kirillzyusko Apr 2, 2024

mountiny removed the request for review from Pujan92 April 2, 2024 22:00

mountiny approved these changes Apr 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

hannojg mentioned this pull request Apr 9, 2024

[$250] [Due for payment 2025-04-18] MEDIUM: [Tracking] Implement more E2E tests and add new metrics #30265

Closed

8 tasks

mountiny merged commit bf1f86a into Expensify:main Apr 9, 2024

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-04-10 #40026

Closed

mountiny changed the title ~~feat: chat TTI~~ [NoQA] feat: chat TTI Apr 15, 2024

melvin-bot Bot mentioned this pull request Apr 18, 2024

[Tracking] Metric - Report screen load time (Performance audit by Callstack) #34494

Closed

Conversation

kirillzyusko commented Apr 2, 2024 • 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 Apr 2, 2024

Uh oh!

kirillzyusko commented Apr 2, 2024

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kirillzyusko commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

adhorodyski commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

kirillzyusko commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Apr 9, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Apr 9, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 10, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 10, 2024

Uh oh!

kavimuru commented Apr 10, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 10, 2024

Uh oh!

kavimuru commented Apr 11, 2024

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Apr 15, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 18, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

kirillzyusko commented Apr 2, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mountiny commented Apr 9, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kavimuru commented Apr 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading