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

chore(j-s): Add initial delay for judicial-system-web startup probe #16802

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Nov 12, 2024

Conversation

AndesKrrrrrrrrrrr
Copy link
Member

@AndesKrrrrrrrrrrr AndesKrrrrrrrrrrr commented Nov 11, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Enhanced readiness probe for the judicial system web service with a timeout setting of 10 seconds.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Adjusted resource requests for the judicial system web component to optimize performance.
  • Documentation

    • Updated configuration files to reflect changes in health checks and resource allocations across various environments (dev, prod, staging).

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 11, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces modifications to the readiness configuration of the serviceSetup function in the judicial-system-web.ts file, changing the readiness endpoint from a string to an object that includes a timeout setting. Additionally, the readiness health check timeout for the judicial-system-web service is updated across multiple YAML configuration files, increasing it from 3 seconds to 10 seconds. Resource requests for the judicial-system-web component are also adjusted, impacting the service's deployment configurations.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
apps/judicial-system/web/infra/judicial-system-web.ts Updated readiness configuration in serviceSetup to include a timeout of 10 seconds.
charts/judicial-system/values.dev.yaml Increased timeoutSeconds for judicial-system-web readiness check from 3 to 10 seconds.
charts/judicial-system/values.prod.yaml Increased timeoutSeconds for judicial-system-web readiness check from 3 to 10 seconds; adjusted CPU request from 200m to 15m.
charts/judicial-system/values.staging.yaml Increased timeoutSeconds for judicial-system-web readiness check from 3 to 10 seconds; adjusted CPU request from 15m to 200m and updated resource limits for judicial-system-backend.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

automerge

Suggested reviewers

  • oddsson
  • robertaandersen

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 gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @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.

@AndesKrrrrrrrrrrr AndesKrrrrrrrrrrr marked this pull request as ready for review November 11, 2024 18:33
@AndesKrrrrrrrrrrr AndesKrrrrrrrrrrr requested a review from a team as a code owner November 11, 2024 18:33
@AndesKrrrrrrrrrrr AndesKrrrrrrrrrrr added the automerge Merge this PR as soon as all checks pass label Nov 11, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
charts/judicial-system/values.dev.yaml (1)

535-535: Consider standardizing timeouts across similar services.

Other services in the cluster are using 3-second timeouts. Consider analyzing their startup behavior to determine if they would also benefit from increased timeouts, especially services with similar resource constraints and initialization needs.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d7bffc4 and b06fb73.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • apps/judicial-system/web/infra/judicial-system-web.ts (1 hunks)
  • charts/judicial-system/values.dev.yaml (1 hunks)
  • charts/judicial-system/values.prod.yaml (1 hunks)
  • charts/judicial-system/values.staging.yaml (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
apps/judicial-system/web/infra/judicial-system-web.ts (1)

Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:

  • NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
  • Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
  • Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
🔇 Additional comments (6)
apps/judicial-system/web/infra/judicial-system-web.ts (2)

24-24: Consider adding startupProbe as mentioned in PR title.

The PR title mentions adding an initial delay for the startup probe, but the changes only modify the readiness probe. Consider adding a startupProbe configuration if the intention is to handle initial application startup differently from regular readiness checks.

Let's check if any other services use startupProbe that we can reference:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Look for existing startupProbe configurations in the codebase
# Expected: Find examples of startupProbe usage if any

echo "Checking for existing startupProbe configurations:"
rg -B 2 -A 2 "startupProbe" "apps/**/*.ts"

24-24: LGTM! Verify alignment with environment configurations.

The change from a simple string to an object with timeoutSeconds: 10 is a good improvement for the readiness probe configuration.

Let's verify this aligns with the environment configurations:

✅ Verification successful

LGTM! The readiness probe configuration is aligned with environment values

The 10-second timeout value in the readiness probe configuration is consistent with the environment configurations in the Helm charts. Looking at the values files:

  • charts/judicial-system/values.dev.yaml: readiness path: '/readiness', timeoutSeconds: 10
  • charts/judicial-system/values.staging.yaml: readiness path: '/readiness', timeoutSeconds: 10
  • charts/judicial-system/values.prod.yaml: readiness path: '/readiness', timeoutSeconds: 10

The change is properly reflected across all environments.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the timeout value matches across all environment files
# Expected: Should find timeoutSeconds: 10 in all environment value files

echo "Checking readiness probe timeout in environment files:"
rg -A 2 "readiness" "**/values*.yaml"

Length of output: 300


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a more precise search for the infrastructure files
echo "Searching for all infrastructure and configuration files:"
fd -e ts -e yaml "judicial-system-web|values" 

echo -e "\nChecking readiness probe configurations:"
rg -B 2 -A 2 "readiness" 

Length of output: 82563

charts/judicial-system/values.dev.yaml (1)

535-535: LGTM! Consider monitoring startup performance.

Increasing the readiness probe timeout from 3 to 10 seconds is reasonable for web applications that might need more time during startup. However, it would be beneficial to monitor the actual startup time to ensure there aren't underlying performance issues causing slow startups.

✅ Verification successful

Timeout increase is consistent with infrastructure patterns

The 10-second readiness probe timeout for the judicial-system-web service is aligned with the infrastructure patterns, as evidenced by:

  • The same 10-second timeout is configured in both staging and production environments
  • The change is defined in the infrastructure code at apps/judicial-system/web/infra/judicial-system-web.ts
  • Most other services use a 3-second timeout, but web applications often need more time for initial startup

The increased timeout is appropriate for this specific web service while monitoring startup performance remains a good practice.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check if other services have similar timeouts
echo "Services with 3-second timeouts that might need adjustment:"
rg "timeoutSeconds: 3" -B 2 | grep -B 2 "readiness:"

Length of output: 975


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual values in production and staging environments
echo "Checking timeout values across environments:"
fd "values\.(prod|staging|dev)\.ya?ml$" --exec grep -B 3 "timeoutSeconds:"

# Also check if there are any other timeout configurations
echo -e "\nChecking all timeout configurations in the codebase:"
rg "timeoutSeconds:" -B 2

Length of output: 90355

charts/judicial-system/values.staging.yaml (1)

535-535: LGTM! Increasing readiness probe timeout.

The increase in readiness probe timeout from 3s to 10s for the judicial-system-web component is appropriate for services that might need additional time to initialize.

Let's verify that this change is consistent across other environment configurations:

charts/judicial-system/values.prod.yaml (2)

535-535: Verify the root cause for increased readiness probe timeout

The timeout increase from 3s to 10s is significant. While this change will give the service more time to become ready, such a large increase might be masking underlying performance issues.

#!/bin/bash
# Check startup logs for potential slowness indicators
rg -A 5 "judicial-system-web.*(?i)(slow|delay|timeout|failed)" 

Line range hint 615-616: Review the significant CPU request reduction

The CPU request has been reduced from 200m to 15m (92.5% reduction). This dramatic decrease raises concerns:

  1. Potential resource starvation under load
  2. Inconsistency with staging environment (200m)

Please provide justification for this reduction and confirm that performance testing has validated this change.

Copy link
Member

@robertaandersen robertaandersen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 12, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 36.53%. Comparing base (3fd0888) to head (d4bb34c).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #16802   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   36.53%   36.53%           
=======================================
  Files        6892     6892           
  Lines      143920   143920           
  Branches    40997    40997           
=======================================
  Hits        52586    52586           
  Misses      91334    91334           
Flag Coverage Δ
api 3.35% <ø> (ø)
application-system-api 41.08% <ø> (ø)
application-template-api-modules 27.58% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 3fd0888...d4bb34c. Read the comment docs.

@kodiakhq kodiakhq bot merged commit df859d4 into main Nov 12, 2024
46 checks passed
@kodiakhq kodiakhq bot deleted the chore/j-s-crashloop branch November 12, 2024 09:24
jonnigs pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 12, 2024
…#16802)

* Add initial delay.

* chore: charts update dirty files

---------

Co-authored-by: andes-it <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Róberta Andersen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: kodiakhq[bot] <49736102+kodiakhq[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
automerge Merge this PR as soon as all checks pass
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants