PromucFlow_constructor/app/client/src/utils/WorkerUtil.ts

253 lines
7.8 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

import { cancelled, delay, put, take } from "redux-saga/effects";
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com> ## Description This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export) syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge it easily. As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily: - add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and - re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes: https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is merged.) ### Why is this needed? This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3, we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function. However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you this: <img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png"> That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it, we need to upgrade to Prettier 2. ### Why enforce `import type`? Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.) I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes refactorings easier. Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!) ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import { Position } from "codemirror"; import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` It’s pretty hard, right? What about now? ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import type { Position } from "codemirror"; import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled. This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it _also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where `codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from "codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports. This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only imports anymore. ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? This was tested to not break the build. ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
import type { Channel } from "redux-saga";
import { channel, buffers } from "redux-saga";
import { uniqueId } from "lodash";
import log from "loglevel";
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com> ## Description This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export) syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge it easily. As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily: - add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and - re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes: https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is merged.) ### Why is this needed? This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3, we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function. However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you this: <img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png"> That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it, we need to upgrade to Prettier 2. ### Why enforce `import type`? Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.) I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes refactorings easier. Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!) ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import { Position } from "codemirror"; import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` It’s pretty hard, right? What about now? ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import type { Position } from "codemirror"; import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled. This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it _also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where `codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from "codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports. This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only imports anymore. ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? This was tested to not break the build. ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
import type { TMessage } from "./MessageUtil";
import { MessageType, sendMessage } from "./MessageUtil";
chore: frontend and backend telemetry updates for execute flow #28800 and #28805 (#28936) ## Description 1. Added frontend and backend custom OTLP telemetry to track execute flow 2. Updated end vars in client side code to match with server sdk intialisation code. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #28800 and #28805 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-11-24 07:39:02 +00:00
import { endSpan, startRootSpan } from "UITelemetry/generateTraces";
import type { WebworkerSpanData } from "UITelemetry/generateWebWorkerTraces";
import {
convertWebworkerSpansToRegularSpans,
newWebWorkerSpanData,
} from "UITelemetry/generateWebWorkerTraces";
/**
* Wrap a webworker to provide a synchronous request-response semantic.
*
* Usage on main thread:
* w = GracefulWorkerService(Worker);
* yield w.start(); // Start the worker
* const workerResponse = yield w.request("my_action", { hello: "world" }); // Send a request, wait for response
*
* Worker will receive:
* {
* method: "my_action",
* requestId: "<unique request id>",
* requestData: { hello: "world" },
* }
*
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
* Worker is expected to respond with an object with exactly the `requestId`, `timeTaken` and `responseData` keys:
* {
* requestId: "<the id it received>",
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
* responseData: 42,
* timeTaken: 23.33,
* }
* All other keys will be ignored.
* We make no assumptions about data type of `requestData` or `responseData`.
*
* Note: The worker will hold ALL requests, even in case of restarts.
* If we do not want that behaviour, we should create a new GracefulWorkerService.
*/
// TODO: Extract the worker wrapper into a library to be useful to anyone with WebWorkers + redux-saga.
// TODO: Add support for timeouts on requests and shutdown.
// TODO: Add a readiness + liveness probes.
export class GracefulWorkerService {
// We keep track of all in-flight requests with these channels.
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
private readonly _channels: Map<string, Channel<any>>;
// The actual WebWorker
private _Worker: Worker | undefined;
// Channels in redux-saga are NOT like signals.
// They operate in `pulse` mode of a signal. But `readiness` is more like a continuous signal.
// This variable provides the equivalent of the `hold` state signal.
// If isReady is false, wait on `this._readyChan` to get the pulse signal.
private _isReady: boolean;
// Channel to signal all waiters that we're ready. Always use it with `this._isReady`.
private readonly _readyChan: Channel<any>;
private readonly _workerClass: Worker;
private listenerChannel: Channel<TMessage<any>>;
constructor(workerClass: Worker) {
this.shutdown = this.shutdown.bind(this);
this.start = this.start.bind(this);
this._broker = this._broker.bind(this);
this.request = this.request.bind(this);
this.respond = this.respond.bind(this);
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
this.ping = this.ping.bind(this);
// Do not buffer messages on this channel
this._readyChan = channel(buffers.none());
this._isReady = false;
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
this._channels = new Map<string, Channel<any>>();
this._workerClass = workerClass;
this.listenerChannel = channel();
}
/**
* Start a new worker and registers our broker.
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
* Note: If the worker is already running, this is a no-op
*/
*start() {
if (this._isReady || this._Worker) return;
this._Worker = this._workerClass;
this._Worker.addEventListener("message", this._broker);
// Inform all pending requests that we're good to go!
this._isReady = true;
yield put(this._readyChan, true);
return this.listenerChannel;
}
/**
* Gracefully shutdown the worker.
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
* Note: If the worker is already stopped / shutting down, this is a no-op
*/
*shutdown() {
if (!this._isReady) return;
// stop accepting new requests
this._isReady = false;
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
// wait for current responses to drain, check every 10 milliseconds
while (this._channels.size > 0) {
yield delay(10);
}
// close the worker
if (!this._Worker) return;
this._Worker.removeEventListener("message", this._broker);
this._Worker.terminate();
this._Worker = undefined;
this.listenerChannel.close();
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
}
/**
* Check if the worker is ready, optionally block on it.
*/
*ready(block = false) {
if (this._isReady && this._Worker) return true;
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
if (block) {
yield take(this._readyChan);
return true;
}
return false;
}
*respond(messageId = "", data = {}): any {
if (!messageId) return;
yield this.ready(true);
if (!this._Worker) return;
const messageType = MessageType.RESPONSE;
feat: widget property setters (#23441) ## Description - This PR adds setter methods to update widget property programmatically. Example:- `Input1.setText("setter methods are cool!");` Docs link : https://docs.appsmith.com/reference/widgets For any selected widget check the `Methods` section #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Jest - [x] Cypress > > #### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2409 #### Issues raised during DP testing - [x] [Errors are not logged in the debugger](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1564017346) separate GitHub issue https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/24609 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1564155545 ( `setVisibility("false")` ) - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1580525843 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1576582825 - Blocker for testing - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1577956441 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1577930108 - Not a issue (lint error query) - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1593471791 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1591440488 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1586747864 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1596738201 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1598541537 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1611413076 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1612621567 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1619654507 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/23441#issuecomment-1621256722 > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [x] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Rishabh Rathod <rishabh.rathod@appsmith.com>
2023-07-08 14:07:26 +00:00
sendMessage.call(this._Worker, {
body: {
data,
},
messageId,
messageType,
});
}
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
*ping(data = {}, messageId?: string): any {
yield this.ready(true);
if (!this._Worker) return;
const messageType = MessageType.DEFAULT;
sendMessage.call(this._Worker, {
body: data,
messageId,
messageType,
});
}
/**
* Send a request to the worker for processing.
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
* If the worker isn't ready, we wait for it to become ready.
*
* @param method identifier for a rpc method
* @param requestData data that we want to send over to the worker
*
* @returns response from the worker
*/
*request(method: string, data = {}): any {
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
yield this.ready(true);
// Impossible case, but helps avoid `?` later in code and makes it clearer.
if (!this._Worker) return;
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
/**
* We create a unique channel to wait for a response of this specific request.
*/
const messageId = `${method}__${uniqueId()}`;
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
const ch = channel();
this._channels.set(messageId, ch);
const mainThreadStartTime = performance.now();
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
let timeTaken;
const rootSpan = startRootSpan(method);
const webworkerTelemetryData: Record<string, WebworkerSpanData> = {
transferDataToWorkerThread: newWebWorkerSpanData(
"transferDataToWorkerThread",
{},
),
};
const body = {
method,
data,
webworkerTelemetry: webworkerTelemetryData,
};
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
try {
sendMessage.call(this._Worker, {
messageType: MessageType.REQUEST,
body: body,
messageId,
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
});
chore: added new relic OTLP exporter (#28480) ## Description - Added new relic OTLP exporter to export eval traces, click event and api calls. - Conditionally loading both browser agent and OTLP scripts based on env variables. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #28504 and #28506 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-11-06 09:35:17 +00:00
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
// The `this._broker` method is listening to events and will pass response to us over this channel.
const response = yield take(ch);
const webworkerTelemetryResponse = response.data
.webworkerTelemetry as Record<string, WebworkerSpanData>;
if (webworkerTelemetryResponse) {
webworkerTelemetryResponse["transferDataToMainThread"].endTime =
Date.now();
}
rootSpan &&
chore: capturing more telemetry data as per fe coder's requirements(#29153) (#29287) ## Description Capturing evalTree telemetry data as well as from a few evaluation saga flows. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #29153 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced telemetry with the ability to specify start times for nested spans. - Introduced web worker span management for improved performance monitoring. - Implemented profiling functions to trace evaluation processes. - **Improvements** - Added telemetry spans to key functions for better performance insights. - Refined control flow to include telemetry span handling in various sagas. - **Documentation** - Updated interface definitions to include new telemetry-related properties. - **Refactor** - Streamlined conditional logic to incorporate telemetry span completion. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-05 05:32:03 +00:00
convertWebworkerSpansToRegularSpans(
rootSpan,
webworkerTelemetryResponse,
chore: capturing more telemetry data as per fe coder's requirements(#29153) (#29287) ## Description Capturing evalTree telemetry data as well as from a few evaluation saga flows. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #29153 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced telemetry with the ability to specify start times for nested spans. - Introduced web worker span management for improved performance monitoring. - Implemented profiling functions to trace evaluation processes. - **Improvements** - Added telemetry spans to key functions for better performance insights. - Refined control flow to include telemetry span handling in various sagas. - **Documentation** - Updated interface definitions to include new telemetry-related properties. - **Refactor** - Streamlined conditional logic to incorporate telemetry span completion. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-05 05:32:03 +00:00
);
timeTaken = response.timeTaken;
return response.data;
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
} finally {
endSpan(rootSpan);
chore: frontend and backend telemetry updates for execute flow #28800 and #28805 (#28936) ## Description 1. Added frontend and backend custom OTLP telemetry to track execute flow 2. Updated end vars in client side code to match with server sdk intialisation code. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #28800 and #28805 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-11-24 07:39:02 +00:00
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
// Log perf of main thread and worker
const mainThreadEndTime = performance.now();
const timeTakenOnMainThread = mainThreadEndTime - mainThreadStartTime;
if (yield cancelled()) {
log.debug(
`Main ${method} cancelled in ${timeTakenOnMainThread.toFixed(2)}ms`,
);
} else {
log.debug(`Main ${method} took ${timeTakenOnMainThread.toFixed(2)}ms`);
}
if (timeTaken) {
const transferTime = timeTakenOnMainThread - timeTaken;
log.debug(` Worker ${method} took ${timeTaken}ms`);
log.debug(` Transfer ${method} took ${transferTime.toFixed(2)}ms`);
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
}
// Cleanup
ch.close();
this._channels.delete(messageId);
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
}
}
private _broker(event: MessageEvent<TMessage<any>>) {
if (!event || !event.data) return;
const { body, messageType } = event.data;
if (messageType === MessageType.RESPONSE) {
const { messageId } = event.data;
if (!messageId) return;
const ch = this._channels.get(messageId);
if (ch) {
ch.put(body);
this._channels.delete(messageId);
}
} else {
this.listenerChannel.put(event.data);
2020-12-30 13:26:44 +00:00
}
}
}