Scheduled post #848
Scheduled post #848
Conversation
| { | ||
| name: "CreateScheduledPost", | ||
| run: c.createScheduledPost, | ||
| frequency: 0.2, | ||
| minServerVersion: semver.MustParse("10.3.0"), | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| name: "UpdateScheduledPost", | ||
| run: c.updateScheduledPost, | ||
| frequency: 0.1, | ||
| minServerVersion: semver.MustParse("10.3.0"), | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| name: "DeleteScheduledPost", | ||
| run: c.deleteScheduledPost, | ||
| frequency: 0.1, | ||
| minServerVersion: semver.MustParse("10.3.0"), | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| name: "SendScheduledPost", | ||
| run: c.sendScheduledPost, | ||
| frequency: 0.1, | ||
| minServerVersion: semver.MustParse("10.3.0"), | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are these frequencies computed from real usage data? Or do we need to create a ticket to update them once this has more widespread usage?
| if rand.Float64() < 0.02 { | ||
| if err := control.AttachFilesToDraft(u, &scheduledPost.Draft); err != nil { | ||
| fmt.Println("createScheduledPost: AttachFilesToDraft error", err) | ||
| return control.UserActionResponse{Err: control.NewUserError(err)} | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably move this 0.02 ratio to a global constant, we're using it in many places now.
| if err := u.DeleteScheduledPost(scheduledPost.Id); err != nil { | ||
| fmt.Println("deleteScheduledPost: DeleteScheduledPost error", err) | ||
| return control.UserActionResponse{Err: control.NewUserError(err)} | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| u.Store().DeleteScheduledPost(scheduledPost.Id) | ||
| return control.UserActionResponse{Info: fmt.Sprintf("scheduled post deleted with id %v", scheduledPost.Id)} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should update the store inside the user's function.
| return control.UserActionResponse{Info: fmt.Sprintf("scheduled post deleted with id %v", scheduledPost.Id)} | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (c *SimulController) sendScheduledPost(u user.User) control.UserActionResponse { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let me see if I understood this action: it forces a post that was scheduled for the future to be sent immediately. If that's correct, could we come up with an action name that conveys that? Something like sendScheduledPostNow or similar? Or maybe adding a comment, if that's not clear enough.
| if err := u.DeleteScheduledPost(scheduledPost.Id); err != nil { | ||
| fmt.Println("sendScheduledPost: DeleteScheduledPost error", err) | ||
| return control.UserActionResponse{Err: control.NewUserError(err)} | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| u.Store().DeleteScheduledPost(scheduledPost.Id) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same here: we should update the store inside the user's DeleteScheduledPost function
| func (s *MemStore) DeleteScheduledPost(scheduledPostID string) { | ||
| s.lock.Lock() | ||
| defer s.lock.Unlock() | ||
|
|
||
| for teamId := range s.scheduledPosts { | ||
| if _, ok := s.scheduledPosts[teamId][scheduledPostID]; ok { | ||
| delete(s.scheduledPosts[teamId], scheduledPostID) | ||
| break | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we know the team ID when deleting the post? We could skip the outer loop if we do.
| id := scheduledPost.ChannelId | ||
| if createdScheduledPost.RootId != "" { | ||
| id = scheduledPost.RootId | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this ChannelId? Does this mean that we can schedule a single post per channel? This happens in UpdateScheduledPost as well.
| for teamIdInResponse := range scheduledPostsByTeam { | ||
| for _, scheduledPost := range scheduledPostsByTeam[teamIdInResponse] { | ||
| err := ue.store.SetScheduledPost(teamID, scheduledPost.Id, scheduledPost) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| fmt.Println("GetTeamScheduledPosts: SetScheduledPost error", err) | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't understand this code, so I took a look at the server code and saw that we use directChannels as a special team ID here to get posts scheduled in DMs. Is this something that can break some assumptions elsewhere in this code? I suppose no, but wanted to double-check.
Nit: also, should we add a ue.store.SetScheduledPostsInTeam so that we can pass it the whole slice of posts?
| RootId: rootId, | ||
| CreateAt: model.GetMillis(), | ||
| }, | ||
| ScheduledAt: loadtest.RandomFutureTime(17_28_00_000, 10), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does 17_28_00_000 mean?
| @@ -87,3 +89,19 @@ func nextPowerOf2(val int) int { | |||
| val++ | |||
| return val | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // RandomFutureTime generates a random time between (now + xMilliseconds) to (now + xDays) in Unix milliseconds. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: can we use the name of the variables themselves? It took me a while to understand the comment
| // RandomFutureTime generates a random time between (now + xMilliseconds) to (now + xDays) in Unix milliseconds. | |
| // RandomFutureTime generates a random time between (now + millisecondsFromNow) to (now + uptoDaysFromNow) in Unix milliseconds. |
Summary
Adding scheduled posts support to load test tool.
Ticket Link
Fixes https://mattermost.atlassian.net/browse/MM-61486