Fix lighthouse % queued on admin panel #43
Conversation
|
@coderabbitai review |
✅ Actions performedReview triggered.
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
django/administration/views.py (2)
52-55: Improved stats calculations with minor optimization opportunityThe changes to the
statsdictionary are good improvements:
inQueueLighthouseis now correctly calculated as a percentage.users_countandurl_countnow properly call thecount()method.performance_countis also calculated as a percentage.These changes enhance the accuracy and usefulness of the statistics.
Consider a minor optimization: use
totalLighthousefor theperformance_countcalculation instead of callingPerformance.objects.count()again. This reduces database queries:'performance_count': inQueueLighthouse / totalLighthouse * 100,
44-55: Overall improvements with suggestions for robustnessThe changes to the
administrationfunction successfully address the PR objective of fixing the lighthouse percentage queued on the admin panel. The introduction of percentage-based statistics forinQueueLighthouseandperformance_countprovides more meaningful insights.To further enhance the robustness of this function, consider the following suggestions:
Add error handling for potential division by zero:
'inQueueLighthouse': (inQueueLighthouse / totalLighthouse * 100) if totalLighthouse else 0, 'performance_count': (inQueueLighthouse / totalLighthouse * 100) if totalLighthouse else 0,Consider rounding the percentage values to improve readability:
'inQueueLighthouse': round((inQueueLighthouse / totalLighthouse * 100), 2) if totalLighthouse else 0,Add a comment explaining the meaning of these statistics for future maintainers.
Would you like assistance in implementing these suggestions?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- django/administration/views.py (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
django/administration/views.py (1)
44-44: LGTM: Introduced totalLighthouse variableThe addition of the
totalLighthousevariable is a good improvement. It provides a clear representation of the total number of Performance objects, which is used in subsequent percentage calculations.
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@sebastienbarbier has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 9 minutes and 3 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. WalkthroughThe changes involve modifications to the Changes
Poem
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
django/administration/views.py (1)
Line range hint
1-78: Summary of changes and suggestions for improvementOverall, the changes to the
administrationfunction improve the calculation of theinQueueLighthousestatistic by representing it as a percentage. This is a good enhancement that provides more meaningful information.However, there are a few areas that need attention:
- The
users_countandurl_countstatistics are not correctly calling thecount()method.- The
performance_countstatistic seems redundant and potentially incorrect.To improve the code further:
- Fix the
users_countandurl_countcalculations by adding parentheses to call thecount()method.- Reconsider the necessity of the
performance_countstatistic. If it's not needed, remove it to simplify the code.- Consider adding comments to explain the purpose of each statistic, especially if
performance_countis retained.These changes will enhance the accuracy and clarity of the administration statistics.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- django/administration/views.py (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
django/administration/views.py (1)
44-44: LGTM: Introduced totalLighthouse variableThe addition of the
totalLighthousevariable is a good improvement. It provides a clear representation of the total number of Performance objects, which is essential for calculating the percentage of queued Lighthouse tasks.
django/administration/views.py
Outdated
| 'inQueueLighthouse': round((inQueueLighthouse / totalLighthouse * 100), 2) if totalLighthouse else 0, | ||
| 'users_count': User.objects.count, | ||
| 'url_count': Service.objects.count, | ||
| 'performance_count': inQueueLighthouse / Performance.objects.count() * 100, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approve inQueueLighthouse calculation, but address other stats issues
-
The updated
inQueueLighthousecalculation is correct and properly handles the case whentotalLighthouseis zero. Good job on this improvement! -
However, there are issues with other stats:
users_countandurl_countare referencing thecountmethod without calling it. They should beUser.objects.count()andService.objects.count()respectively.
-
The
performance_countcalculation seems redundant and potentially incorrect:- It's calculating a percentage of
inQueueLighthouseagain, which is already done in theinQueueLighthousestat. - It's using
Performance.objects.count()directly here, whiletotalLighthouseis used elsewhere.
- It's calculating a percentage of
Consider applying these changes:
'stats': {
'inQueueLighthouse': round((inQueueLighthouse / totalLighthouse * 100), 2) if totalLighthouse else 0,
- 'users_count': User.objects.count,
- 'url_count': Service.objects.count,
- 'performance_count': inQueueLighthouse / Performance.objects.count() * 100,
+ 'users_count': User.objects.count(),
+ 'url_count': Service.objects.count(),
}Also, please clarify the purpose of performance_count. If it's meant to represent the same thing as inQueueLighthouse, you might want to remove it to avoid redundancy.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| 'inQueueLighthouse': round((inQueueLighthouse / totalLighthouse * 100), 2) if totalLighthouse else 0, | |
| 'users_count': User.objects.count, | |
| 'url_count': Service.objects.count, | |
| 'performance_count': inQueueLighthouse / Performance.objects.count() * 100, | |
| 'inQueueLighthouse': round((inQueueLighthouse / totalLighthouse * 100), 2) if totalLighthouse else 0, | |
| 'users_count': User.objects.count(), | |
| 'url_count': Service.objects.count(), |
Refs: #42
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes