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

fix (oom): added missing event fields #444

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 21, 2020

Conversation

robinmacharg
Copy link
Contributor

@robinmacharg robinmacharg commented Jan 17, 2020

Goal

To add fields that appear in non-OOM events to OOM events (codeBundleId, locale, osName and modelNumber).

Design

The fields are trivial additions that add values to the info cached by the OOM watchdog.

Changeset

New fields added to the generateCacheInfoWithConfig() method of BSGOutOfMemoryWatchdog.

Tests

Manual testing to ensure values were being sent through. An additional unit test was added to ensure that expected keys/values are present in the cache.

Review

Outstanding Questions

There is some commonality with non-OOM fields. Is there scope for generalising the event field population?

Expected fields are tested for. There are no tests for unexpected fields; should there be?

  • This pull request is ready for:
    • Initial review of the intended approach, not yet feature complete
    • Structural review of the classes, functions, and properties modified
    • Final review
  • The correct target branch has been selected (master for fixes, next for
    features)
  • Consistency across platforms for structures or concepts added or modified
  • Consistency between the changeset and the goal stated above
  • Internal consistency with the rest of the library - is there any overlap between existing interfaces and any which have been added?
  • Usage friction - is the proposed change in usage cumbersome or complicated?
  • Performance and complexity - are there any cases of unexpected O(n^3) when iterating, recursing, flat mapping, etc?
  • Concurrency concerns - if components are accessed asynchronously, what issues will arise
  • Thoroughness of added tests and any missing edge cases
  • Idiomatic use of the language

@robinmacharg robinmacharg force-pushed the robinmacharg/add-missing-oom-fields branch from ca73634 to eee9cb1 Compare January 17, 2020 16:49
@robinmacharg robinmacharg requested a review from kattrali January 17, 2020 17:00
@robinmacharg robinmacharg marked this pull request as ready for review January 17, 2020 17:05
Copy link
Contributor

@kattrali kattrali left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice one! Marked one very small nit but looks good to me.

Source/BSGOutOfMemoryWatchdog.m Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@kattrali kattrali merged commit b1583db into master Jan 21, 2020
@kattrali kattrali deleted the robinmacharg/add-missing-oom-fields branch January 21, 2020 13:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants