Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SQS-406 | E2E Tests: Increase expected latency upper bound for /passthrough/active-orders enpoint #514

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 18, 2024

Conversation

deividaspetraitis
Copy link
Collaborator

@deividaspetraitis deividaspetraitis commented Sep 17, 2024

This PR Increases latency upper bound from 150ms to 450ms based on our current observations via monitoring tools to make tests less noisy.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes
    • Adjusted the expected latency threshold to accommodate higher latency values, which may improve test reliability under varying performance conditions.

/passthrough/active-orders enpoint

This PR Increases latency upper bound from 150ms to 450ms based on our
current observations via monitoring tools to make tests less noisy.
@deividaspetraitis deividaspetraitis added the A:backport/v26.x backport patches to v26.x branch label Sep 17, 2024
@deividaspetraitis deividaspetraitis self-assigned this Sep 17, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 17, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the constant EXPECTED_LATENCY_UPPER_BOUND_MS in the file tests/test_passthrough.py, changing its value from 150 to 450. This change increases the upper limit for expected latency, which may affect performance testing criteria and thresholds within the application.

Changes

File Change Summary
tests/test_passthrough.py Modified EXPECTED_LATENCY_UPPER_BOUND_MS from 150 to 450

Possibly related PRs

Poem

🐇 In the meadow where we play,
Latency bounds have found their way.
From one-fifty to four-fifty high,
We leap and bound, oh my, oh my!
With every test, we dance and cheer,
For new thresholds bring us near! 🌼


Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between ef402b6 and 28f9afe.

Files selected for processing (1)
  • tests/test_passthrough.py (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (1)
tests/test_passthrough.py (1)

12-12: Latency upper bound increased to reduce test failures.

The change aligns with the PR objective to reduce test failures caused by latency fluctuations exceeding the previous upper bound of 150ms.

However, it's important to monitor the actual latencies over time to ensure that:

  1. The new upper bound of 450ms is not excessively high, which could potentially mask genuine performance issues.
  2. The endpoint performance remains acceptable and within the expected range.

Consider setting up alerts or regular reports to track the latency trends and revisit the upper bound if necessary based on the observed data.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    -- I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    -- Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    -- @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    -- @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    -- @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    -- @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    -- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    -- @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Sep 17, 2024

Copy link
Collaborator

@cryptomatictrader cryptomatictrader left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! Thanks!

@deividaspetraitis deividaspetraitis changed the base branch from v25.x to v26.x September 18, 2024 08:32
@deividaspetraitis deividaspetraitis changed the base branch from v26.x to v25.x September 18, 2024 08:32
@deividaspetraitis deividaspetraitis merged commit 5e68e21 into v25.x Sep 18, 2024
11 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A:backport/v26.x backport patches to v26.x branch
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants