Added view for showing detailed trace statistics #506

fylip97 · 2020-01-08T09:19:32Z

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler [email protected]

Which problem is this PR solving?

This view should help to quickly analyze and identify root causes and anti-patterns. For example, this view can be useful to detect n+1 anti-pattern as @AlexanderWert already mentioned in [Bug]: Prevent Critical Path code from throwing exceptions #1779

Short description of the changes

A new view called Trace Overview was created. The folder for the view, all dependencies and methods who are needed are located in a subfolder called “TracePageOverview” of “TracePage”

codecov · 2020-01-08T09:30:06Z

Codecov Report

Merging #506 into master will decrease coverage by 0.86%.
The diff coverage is 85.53%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #506      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   93.56%   92.69%   -0.87%     
==========================================
  Files         217      227      +10     
  Lines        5296     5911     +615     
  Branches     1362     1491     +129     
==========================================
+ Hits         4955     5479     +524     
- Misses        300      391      +91     
  Partials       41       41

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...i/src/components/DeepDependencies/Header/index.tsx	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
...jaeger-ui/src/components/QualityMetrics/Header.tsx	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
...ents/TracePage/TracePageHeader/TracePageHeader.tsx	`96.42% <ø> (ø)`
...s/jaeger-ui/src/components/common/NameSelector.tsx	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
...racePage/TraceStatistics/TraceStatisticsHeader.tsx	`30.76% <30.76%> (ø)`
.../components/TracePage/TraceStatistics/PopupSql.tsx	`66.66% <66.66%> (ø)`
...onents/TracePage/TraceStatistics/MainTableData.tsx	`70.96% <70.96%> (ø)`
...mponents/TracePage/TraceStatistics/HeaderTable.tsx	`75.00% <75.00%> (ø)`
...src/components/TracePage/TraceStatistics/index.tsx	`76.61% <76.61%> (ø)`
...ents/TracePage/TraceStatistics/DetailTableData.tsx	`82.60% <82.60%> (ø)`
... and 19 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 89f0050...d6710ac. Read the comment docs.

everett980 · 2020-01-08T17:08:02Z

Hi Philip, this view looks pretty good but I have a few questions:

What are the Service Name and Operation Name drop downs for?
What is the color button for?
It seems as though ST in Duration is span max self time / span max time, I'm wondering if span max self time / trace duration might be more useful for time-based RCA? Or in the case of identifying n+1 anti-patterns, non-overlapping total self time / trace duration might be what we want? Though that would require calculating the non-overlapping total self time for a collection of spans.
Also the new folder is called TraceTagOverview, is there a form of tag analysis? Such as determining which tags have the highest (self) time?

fylip97 · 2020-01-09T10:19:36Z

Hi Everett,

thanks for your feedback and questions!

The first drop down box specifies the attribute (Service Name, Operation Name or a tag) by which the spans are grouped/splitted. With the second drop down box, it is possible to extend the grouping and split the resulting groups again. For example, if "Service Name" and "Operation Name" are selected, the table splits the spans by the "Service Name" and after that by "Operation Name".
The color button colors the table according to the value of the "ST in Duration" with different shades of red. This is done according to the "ST Button" in the "Trace Graph" view.
Until now "ST in Duration" is calculated total self time / total duration, like it is done in the "Trace Graph" view.
Yes, as mentioned in 1, you can group/split the spans not only by Service and Operation Name, but also use all existing tags here. See also the following example screenshot where I've splitted the spans according to their "database" tag and the "service name". This results in a table which database (if the tag specifies the used database) is used by which service. The "Others" element on the bottom represents the spans which do not contain the splitting attribute, in this case the "database" tag.

yurishkuro · 2020-01-09T18:59:19Z

Add a caption "Group by:" in front of the drop-downs.

Is the first screenshot an example of Colored table?

tiffon

This is a really fantastic feature and it's great to see this PR. Thank you!

I don't have time for a full review, but I left a few comments. Let me know if any of them don't make sense or there is some other issue with them.

tiffon · 2020-01-13T01:57:38Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/index.tsx

      hideSummary: Boolean(embedded && embedded.timeline.hideSummary),
      linkToStandalone: getUrl(id),
      nextResult: this.nextResult,
      onArchiveClicked: this.archiveTrace,
      onSlimViewClicked: this.toggleSlimView,
-      onTraceGraphViewClicked: this.toggleTraceGraphView,
+      onTraceGraphViewClicked: this.toogleTraceView,


I suggest renaming the prop to onTraceViewChange since it is no longer specific to the trace graph view.

tiffon · 2020-01-13T02:29:25Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/index.tsx

-          ))}
+          (() => {
+            switch (selectedTraceView) {
+              case 0:


This code doesn't indicate selectedTraceView is actually referring to the index of the current selection from the menuItems in AltViewOptions.tsx. The ordering of values in menuItems must match this switch statement, and this isn't particular evident. This might be hard to follow for someone looking at it without the context of this PR.

I think it would be easier to follow if you create an enum for the trace view types in packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/types.tsx. These can then be the value passed through the callback. Also, the array of values in AltViewOptions.tsx can refer to the enum and define the label.

enum ETraceViewType { TraceGraph = 'TraceGraph', // etc. } const menuItems = [ { viewType: ETraceViewType.TraceGraph, label: 'Trace Graph', }, // etc. }

tiffon · 2020-01-13T02:30:32Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/AltViewOptions.tsx

-  const { onTraceGraphViewClicked, traceGraphView, traceID } = props;
+  const { onTraceGraphViewClicked, traceID, selectedTraceView } = props;
+
+  const menuItems = ['Trace Timeline', 'Trace Graph', 'Trace Overview'];


This can be a top-level value because it doesn't change / is not based on the arguments to the function.

tiffon · 2020-01-13T02:56:22Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/AltViewOptions.tsx

+      <Button
+        className="ub-mr2"
+        htmlType="button"
+        onClick={() => onTraceGraphViewClicked(selectedTraceView + 1)}


This + 1 is kind of odd. At first I thought repeatedly clicking the button would go from the timeline view to the graph and then get stuck on the trace overview. Then I checked toggleTraceView and saw that it cycles back to the front if index > 2.

Originally, when there were only the Trace Timeline and Trace Graph views, this button was intended to show the label for the current view and clicking it would toggle to the other view (reference to the PR).

Now with the three trace views and the two JSON views (and potentially more trace views later), I think there is a really a diminishing return on value of the button cycling through the three trace views, especially considering it ignores the JSON views when cycling, which makes it less intuitive (IMO).

I suggest having this button should show the label of the current view and do nothing when the button itself is clicked. Currently, the dropdown options are shown when the user hovers on the button. It seems fine for the user to select an item from the list. IMO, that's not much work and is not likely to be confusing.

@everett980, @yurishkuro what do you think?

I suggest having this button should show the label of the current view and do nothing when the button itself is clicked.

+1
We had discussed doing this even before this PR. So rather than complicating the button I agree it should only be a dropdown and not a button.

tiffon · 2020-01-13T02:58:19Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/TracePageHeader.tsx

@@ -187,14 +188,14 @@ export function TracePageHeaderFn(props: TracePageHeaderEmbedProps & { forwarded
          ref={forwardedRef}
          resultCount={resultCount}
          textFilter={textFilter}
-          navigable={!traceGraphView}
+          navigable={!(selectedTraceView !== 0)}


Why not use selectedTraceView === 0?

tiffon · 2020-01-13T03:00:33Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TraceTagOverview/PopupSQL.css

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+/*


For consistency (e.g. with UiFindInput.*), the file should be named PopupSql.css

tiffon · 2020-01-13T03:00:38Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TraceTagOverview/PopupSQL.tsx

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+// Copyright (c) 2018 The Jaeger Authors.


For consistency (e.g. with UiFindInput.*), the file should be named PopupSql.css

tiffon · 2020-01-13T03:10:23Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TraceTagOverview/index.css

+limitations under the License.
+*/
+
+#title {


Using IDs in CSS selectors is an anti-pattern. What's the advantage of using an ID here instead of a CSS class?

tiffon · 2020-01-13T03:20:06Z

Also, can you add a few screenshots showing the various states of the UI?

Also, I meant to add, in your second screenshot (img), the indentation in the first column looks a like it is not working right.

Lastly, what do you think of also indenting the values in the second column, the count column? I'm wondering if that will make the roll-up / grouping more obvious.

fylip97 · 2020-01-13T16:04:05Z

The first screenshot shows the view grouped by only one value.

The next screenshot shows the possibilities to group them further. Tags are marked with "Tag:".

The view is grouped by two values.

This should show the interaction with the search. The search is for "api-gateway". The found hits are marked yellow.

By clicking on a column, the detailed view below is hidden. In this screen the column with “api-gateway” was clicked and the "Operation Names" for this “Service Name” were hidden.

This shows the coloring of the detail view according to the value of the ST in Duration.

At sql tags it is possible to display the complete sql in a popup by clicking on the column.

everett980 · 2020-01-15T17:41:47Z

I finally got a chance to play around with this branch and I have to say it's very clear how this will be useful!

Now that I've tried it, some follow up questions/feedback:

As Yuri mentioned:

Add a caption "Group by:" in front of the drop-downs.

A caption would be helpful. If you change the Dropdowns to NameSelectors you can give the first selector the label prop "Group By" and still initialize it to "Service Name". The second selector can be given the following props: placeholder: "Optional Sub-Group..." and label: "Sub-Group", as well as the required prop false to make this field clearable.
If you choose to use this component it would be great to move it to src/components/common.

I would change the "color" button to a Checkbox next to a NameSelector with the label "Color by" and the options would be the different numerical columns. This selector should also be required (otherwise a checked Checkbox doesn't make much sense) and can default to its current column.
Regarding:

Until now "ST in Duration" is calculated total self time / total duration, like it is done in the "Trace Graph" view.

I'm still not sure how useful % ST in span duration is. A 10s span with 40% ST is a better opportunity for optimization than a 0.2s span with 100% ST but the latter will be much redder.
The "Trace Graph" view is considered experimental and can be tweaked / diverged from as we see fit.
If this is looking to help fix n+1 anti-patterns, then a metric that works out to be "non-concurrent-within-same-parent ST" as well as % of that in total Trace time seems like the silver bullet IMO.
That said, my changes proposed in 2. would at least address my net ST use case.

I'd like to +1 Joe's suggestion:

Lastly, what do you think of also indenting the values in the second column, the count column? I'm wondering if that will make the roll-up / grouping more obvious.

Indenting sub-group numerical metrics would be nice, especially on large traces where a single group may have many sub-groups.

I'd prefer if the label "Others" were replaced by another term that conveyed the sub-group dimension was missing. As of yet tags are the only dimension that could be missing, so a label like 'Without tag: "SQL"' should work. This is mostly for the case where there are many sub-groups so "Others" could be misinterpreted as "less prevalent values grouped together", as one would see on a pie chart.
This should be considered as a future feature and need not be included yet, but what do you think of the ability to add more than one level of sub-grouping? E.g.: Group by service name & operation name & tag SQL?
I don't think the name "Trace Overview" really communicates what this is used for, something like "Trace Statistics" would be more descriptive.
Lastly, because I think this feature is great and I would want to promote it if it does not gain traction organically, can you add a GA metric to TracePageHeader.track.tsx to trackStatisticsView?

fylip97 · 2020-01-27T11:55:09Z

This change is

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]>

fylip97 · 2020-02-07T14:50:00Z

@everett980 do you have any idea why the test "fetchTrace: encountered a declaration exception" is failing?
Locally on my computer all tests run through without problems.

everett980 · 2020-02-07T16:23:23Z

@everett980 do you have any idea why the test "fetchTrace: encountered a declaration exception" is failing?
Locally on my computer all tests run through without problems.

@fylip97 Looking at the failing test, it seems to use random numbers. It seems to have a 1e-5 chance of failing. Maybe you got unlucky (and maybe I'm misreading the probability, but definitely see chance), so I'd recommend running travis again.

yurishkuro · 2020-02-07T18:40:01Z

could we not mock random for the tests?

everett980 · 2020-02-12T16:18:32Z

could we not mock random for the tests?

I looks like the code deliberately tries to avoid this issue but has a 1/100000 chance of not avoiding it enough. It should be easy to simply add a small number to one of the two random numbers and it wouldn't happen.

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]>

everett980 · 2020-02-21T20:19:07Z

@fylip97 I know I wrote a bit of a saga, but can you let me know your thoughts on these questions?

Also, if the UI has changed in your commits since 1/13, can you please add updated screenshots?

Lastly, many of the comments left by tiffon are now labeled as Outdated by Github. This indicates the line was changed, but Github itself doesn't know if the requested changes were implemented. Can you mark completed comments as resolved?

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]>

fylip97 · 2020-02-26T14:43:06Z

Hi @everett980,
I'd like to respond briefly to your little saga:

I have change the Dropdowns to NameSelectors. I have also added lables before them. The components were moved to src/components/common.

I removed the "color" button and replaced it with a Checkbox. A selector was added next to the Checkbox.

I change the calculation. The ST in Duration is now the percentage of ST of the total trace duration.
All values from the Sub Group are now indented.
I have change the Other label to Without Tag.
I like the idea to add more than one level of sub-grouping.
The view is now called Trace Statistics.
GA metrics are added for this view.

everett980

Sorry it took me so long to get through this all. I really like the changes made with the checkbox and drop downs.

I've left a fair bit of feedback, but most of it should be pretty quickly actionable.

Please double check the copyright years for new files throughout. Any new file should be 2020.

Lastly, I think the CSS for widths needs to be reworked. I noticed in the CSS that the widths specified are very precise. Then, with a selected subgroup, the widths seem slightly broken.
Not selected:

Selected:

I mentioned how to stop using float. With that change, it should be much easier to style the column widths without exact percentages. The first column can simply flex grow and the rest can be default table styling widths that should accommodate their largest item. If necessary, a maximum width can be added to the other columns, with text overflow ellipsis and a tool tip.

Related: I have noticed that text in the first column can be truncated. For SQL tags, it is possible to view the entire tag in a modal. For everything else, the approach I mentioned for long durations should be used (an ellipsis (already implemented) and a tooltip).

everett980 · 2020-02-26T15:58:40Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/AltViewOptions.tsx


 type Props = {
-  onTraceGraphViewClicked: () => void;
-  traceGraphView: boolean;
+  onTraceViewChange: (actualViewType: ETraceViewType) => void;


what does "actual" mean here?

everett980 · 2020-02-26T15:58:52Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/AltViewOptions.tsx

 };

+const menuItems = [


const MENU_ITEMS

everett980 · 2020-02-26T16:05:39Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/AltViewOptions.tsx

  return (
    <Dropdown overlay={menu}>
-      <Button className="ub-mr2" htmlType="button" onClick={handleToggleView}>
-        Alternate Views <Icon type="down" />
+      <Button className="ub-mr2" htmlType="button">


This shouldn't be an action-less button, instead it should be a span.

everett980 · 2020-02-26T16:06:32Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/TracePageHeader.tsx

@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ type TracePageHeaderEmbedProps = {
  nextResult: () => void;
  onArchiveClicked: () => void;
  onSlimViewClicked: () => void;
-  onTraceGraphViewClicked: () => void;
+  onTraceViewChange: (actualViewType: ETraceViewType) => void;


again, why actual?

everett980 · 2020-02-26T16:07:02Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TraceStatistics/DetailTableData.css

@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+/*
+Copyright (c) 2018 The Jaeger Authors.


please update to 2020

everett980 · 2020-03-10T23:24:09Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/AltViewOptions.tsx

-      <Button className="ub-mr2" htmlType="button" onClick={handleToggleView}>
-        Alternate Views <Icon type="down" />
+      <Button className="ub-mr2" htmlType="button">
+        {menuItems.find(test => test.viewType === viewType) !== undefined


I'd calculate the dropdownText outside of the return value. and I think this:

const currentItem = menuItems.find(item => item.viewType === viewType); const dropdownText = currentItem ? currentItem.label : 'Alternate Views';

is clearer and better handles the (presumably impossible) case of an invalid current viewType.

everett980 · 2020-03-10T23:26:16Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/AltViewOptions.tsx

-          {traceGraphView ? 'Trace Timeline' : 'Trace Graph'}
-        </a>
-      </Menu.Item>
+      {menuItems.map(item =>


This would be clearer as:

{menuItems.filter(item => item.viewType !== viewType).map(item => ( <Menu.Item key={item.viewType}> {/* ... */} </Menu.Item> ))}

everett980 · 2020-03-10T23:42:12Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TracePageHeader/AltViewOptions.test.js

-    expect(props.onTraceGraphViewClicked).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);
-
-    wrapper.setProps({ traceGraphView: false });
+  it('track dropdown menu', () => {


due to the increase in views, this test is getting slightly out of hand. I would rework it as follows:

const viewInteractions = [{ link: 'Trace Graph', trackFn: trackGraphView, onTraceViewChangeArg: ETraceViewType.TraceGraph, }, { link: 'Trace Statistics', trackFn: trackStatisticsView, onTraceViewChangeArg: ETraceViewType.TraceStatisticsView, propViewType: ETraceViewType.TraceGraph, }, { link: 'Trace Timeline', trackFn: trackGanttView, onTraceViewChangeArg: ETraceViewType.TraceTimelineViewer, propViewType: ETraceViewType.TraceStatisticsView }]; viewInteractions.forEach(({ link, trackFn, onTraceViewChangeArg, propViewType }, i) => { if (propViewType) { wrapper.setProps({ viewType: propViewType }); } expect(props.onTraceViewChange).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(i); expect(trackFn).not.toHaveBeenCalled(); getLink(link).simulate('click'); expect(props.onTraceViewChange).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(i + 1); expect(props.onTraceViewChange).toHaveBeenLastCalledWith(onTraceViewChangeArg); viewInteractions.forEach(({ trackFn: fn, j }) => { expect(fn).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(j <= i ? 1 : 0); }); });

everett980 · 2020-03-10T23:46:37Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TraceStatistics/TraceStatisticsHeader.tsx

+  ['Avg', 'avg'],
+  ['Min', 'min'],
+  ['Max', 'max'],
+  ['Total ST', 'self'],


please update this to ['ST Total', 'selfTotal'],, for consistency.

Likewise, please update the corresponding column header of the table.

everett980 · 2020-03-10T23:46:54Z

packages/jaeger-ui/src/components/TracePage/TraceStatistics/TraceStatisticsHeader.tsx

+  ['ST Avg', 'selfAvg'],
+  ['ST Min', 'selfMin'],
+  ['ST Max', 'selfMax'],
+  ['ST Duration', 'percent'],


please update this to 'ST in Duration'

everett980 · 2020-04-20T21:07:40Z

Hi @fylip97, just wanted to check in on this PR. About a month ago you replied to nearly all of my feedback saying they've been addressed. If you'd like help with the last two items or don't have time to complete that yourself, you can push the changes you have done and I can review the changes and tackle the last two items.

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]>

fylip97 · 2020-04-21T14:46:19Z

Hi @everett980
I just pushed my changes.
At the moment I have very little time and would like to accept your offer.

idohalevi · 2020-07-02T07:00:04Z

@fylip97 @everett980 Thank you for this great feature. Is there any way I can assist in pushing this PR?

Signed-off-by: Everett Ross <[email protected]>

everett980

Apologies it took me so long to get to this. I got pulled in another direction.

This feature looks great and I'm super excited to get it out in front of people.

yurishkuro · 2020-07-28T18:26:31Z

🎉 🎉 🎉

AlexanderWert · 2020-07-29T06:03:49Z

Great! Happy to see this feature being approved!

* Added view for showing detailed trace statistics * Reworked trace statistics ui * review included * feedback added Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]> * Handle merge conflict, clean up AltViewOptions style Signed-off-by: Everett Ross <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Philip <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Everett Ross <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: vvvprabhakar <[email protected]>

tiffon reviewed Jan 13, 2020

View reviewed changes

fylip97 force-pushed the master branch from a48a789 to fb61183 Compare January 23, 2020 15:28

fylip97 force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from 28bebc9 to 7e0e25b Compare January 27, 2020 13:23

fylip97 added 2 commits January 27, 2020 14:34

Added view for showing detailed trace statistics

8124a95

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]>

Reworked trace statistics ui

b0f4837

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]>

fylip97 force-pushed the master branch from 7e0e25b to f9fab21 Compare January 27, 2020 13:45

fylip97 force-pushed the master branch from f9fab21 to c196dec Compare February 6, 2020 10:40

Merge remote-tracking branch 'refs/remotes/jaeger/master'

fb08bd7

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]>

fylip97 force-pushed the master branch from c196dec to fb08bd7 Compare February 13, 2020 15:46

everett980 mentioned this pull request Feb 25, 2020

Comparing traces by latency #513

Open

review included

3b2c011

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]>

fylip97 force-pushed the master branch from ec89569 to 3b2c011 Compare February 26, 2020 14:09

everett980 requested changes Mar 12, 2020

View reviewed changes

feedback added

72aa762

Signed-off-by: Philip Dengler <[email protected]>

fylip97 force-pushed the master branch from cd48d34 to 72aa762 Compare April 21, 2020 14:45

everett980 and others added 3 commits July 24, 2020 15:03

Merge branch 'master' into master

bb39023

Handle merge conflict, clean up AltViewOptions style

0841863

Signed-off-by: Everett Ross <[email protected]>

Merge branch 'master' into master

d6710ac

everett980 approved these changes Jul 28, 2020

View reviewed changes

everett980 merged commit 8279218 into jaegertracing:master Jul 28, 2020

yurishkuro mentioned this pull request Aug 17, 2020

Plan for 1.19 release jaegertracing/jaeger#2398

Closed

Added view for showing detailed trace statistics #506

Added view for showing detailed trace statistics #506

Conversation

fylip97 commented Jan 8, 2020

Which problem is this PR solving?

Short description of the changes

codecov bot commented Jan 8, 2020 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

everett980 commented Jan 8, 2020 • edited Loading

fylip97 commented Jan 9, 2020

yurishkuro commented Jan 9, 2020

tiffon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

everett980 Jan 13, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tiffon commented Jan 13, 2020

fylip97 commented Jan 13, 2020 • edited Loading

everett980 commented Jan 15, 2020

fylip97 commented Jan 27, 2020

fylip97 commented Feb 7, 2020

everett980 commented Feb 7, 2020 • edited Loading

yurishkuro commented Feb 7, 2020

everett980 commented Feb 12, 2020

everett980 commented Feb 21, 2020

fylip97 commented Feb 26, 2020 • edited Loading

everett980 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

everett980 commented Apr 20, 2020

fylip97 commented Apr 21, 2020

idohalevi commented Jul 2, 2020

everett980 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

yurishkuro commented Jul 28, 2020

AlexanderWert commented Jul 29, 2020

codecov bot commented Jan 8, 2020 •

edited

Loading

everett980 commented Jan 8, 2020 •

edited

Loading

everett980 Jan 13, 2020 •

edited

Loading

fylip97 commented Jan 13, 2020 •

edited

Loading

everett980 commented Feb 7, 2020 •

edited

Loading

fylip97 commented Feb 26, 2020 •

edited

Loading