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

[META] Synthetics Beta Release #61

Closed
29 tasks done
andrewvc opened this issue Sep 28, 2020 · 20 comments
Closed
29 tasks done

[META] Synthetics Beta Release #61

andrewvc opened this issue Sep 28, 2020 · 20 comments
Labels

Comments

@andrewvc
Copy link
Contributor

andrewvc commented Sep 28, 2020

Decision items

Other

@drewpost
Copy link

@andrewvc - I would like to support at least Webkit in addition to Chromium in a production product so can "decision on browser" be scoped to look at having two browsers in the Playwright package?

@andrewvc
Copy link
Contributor Author

@drewpost going from 1 -> 2 browsers requires investigation in terms of handling perf data, we use the chrome debug protocol to extract perf data now. Supporting web kit would mean normalizing two formats AFAIK

@jahtalab @vigneshshanmugam your thoughts?

CC @paulb-elastic

@hmdhk
Copy link
Contributor

hmdhk commented Oct 1, 2020

At the moment, a lot of key features depend on chrome devtools protocol (e.g. Tracing, Network, Performance) which means these won't be available for other browsers if we choose to add them.

So I see two options:

  1. We add multi-browser support but with the understanding that those features won't be available. This is lower effort, but the UI needs to account for the missing features (and UX will suffer)
  2. We can investigate ad-hoc solutions to bring some of those features to other browsers. This is high effort and there's no guarantee that we can bring all of the features.

I'm leaning towards option 1. but we should make sure that the set of features available can be at least somewhat useful for the users.

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

We may also want to consider focusing on a single browser for now (in beta and even in GA), as we build up features and capabilities.

As soon as we add another browser, it at least doubles the testing we need to do, plus the additional complexity of any code divergence to handle both and understanding which features work in which browsers (which could become difficult to track).

@vigneshshanmugam
Copy link
Member

There is an easy way out here, We can support webkit by calling out as some features as minimal pointed already in the thread. Minimal here means

  • We can already get the Waterfall working as Playwright already supports way of extracting Request/Response data.
  • Filmstrips wont be possible at the same sampling interval as chromium as we rely on Chrome Devtools protocol. However, we can support filmstrips by capturing screenshots which would make out tests slower but still possible
  • Performance metrics, we don't surface it at the moment so not a huge concern.

But personally for the Beta, I would still prefer to keep it to one browser and understand our customer base and then go full fledged.

@drewpost
Copy link

drewpost commented Oct 8, 2020

Happy to keep it one browser for beta as long as there's scope for adding in another in the future.

@andrewvc
Copy link
Contributor Author

andrewvc commented Oct 8, 2020

OK, it sounds like the decision here is to keep to one browser and revisit in the future then. Is that right?

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

Some items moved from beta to the GA phase

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

Categorised the requirements into those that are awaiting a decision, and those that require an implementation

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

Added the requirement to change the behaviour such that the Synthetic Agent does not capture filmstrip images by default, but enable them via a feature flag/configuration (#143)

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

Moved #144 from beta to GA deliverable

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

As per this discussion, we are moving the bigger security changes https://github.com/elastic/uptime-dev/issues/32 from beta to GA, but adding the sandbox option (synthetics implementation, heartbeat implementation) as a beta requirement.

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

Added #185 to the scope of beta

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

Added #191 as a beta requirement

@vigneshshanmugam
Copy link
Member

Adding #172 as a beta requirement as its a bug and happens for all suites that are run as TS files.

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

Moving remote ZIP support from being in GA to be in for beta

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

The above change of scope has been reverted. Remote Zip URL support for heartbeat synthetics has been taken out of this (beta) and added back into GA.

@paulb-elastic
Copy link
Contributor

elastic/uptime#271 made beta, so added back into here

@vigneshshanmugam
Copy link
Member

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants