Skip to content

[doc] Add an ADR on the introduction of performance tests#6330

Open
sbegaudeau wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
sbe/specification/adr-performance-measurement
Open

[doc] Add an ADR on the introduction of performance tests#6330
sbegaudeau wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
sbe/specification/adr-performance-measurement

Conversation

@sbegaudeau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Signed-off-by: Stéphane Bégaudeau stephane.begaudeau@obeo.fr

Pull request template

General purpose

What is the main goal of this pull request?

  • Bug fixes
  • New features
  • Documentation
  • Cleanup
  • Tests
  • Build / releng

Project management

  • Has the pull request been added to the relevant project and milestone? (Only if you know that your work is part of a specific iteration such as the current one)
  • Have the priority: and pr: labels been added to the pull request? (In case of doubt, start with the labels priority: low and pr: to review later)
  • Have the relevant issues been added to the pull request?
  • Have the relevant labels been added to the issues? (area:, difficulty:, type:)
  • Have the relevant issues been added to the same project and milestone as the pull request?
  • Has the CHANGELOG.adoc been updated to reference the relevant issues?
  • Have the relevant API breaks been described in the CHANGELOG.adoc? (Including changes in the GraphQL API)
  • In case of a change with a visual impact, are there any screenshots in the CHANGELOG.adoc? For example in doc/screenshots/2022.5.0-my-new-feature.png

Architectural decision records (ADR)

  • Does the title of the commit contributing the ADR start with [doc]?
  • Are the ADRs mentioned in the relevant section of the CHANGELOG.adoc?

Dependencies

  • Are the new / upgraded dependencies mentioned in the relevant section of the CHANGELOG.adoc?
  • Are the new dependencies justified in the CHANGELOG.adoc?

Frontend

This section is not relevant if your contribution does not come with changes to the frontend.

General purpose

  • Is the code properly tested? (Plain old JavaScript tests for business code and tests based on React Testing Library for the components)

Typing

We need to improve the typing of our code, as such, we require every contribution to come with proper TypeScript typing for both changes contributing new files and those modifying existing files.
Please ensure that the following statements are true for each file created or modified (this may require you to improve code outside of your contribution).

  • Variables have a proper type
  • Functions’ arguments have a proper type
  • Functions’ return type are specified
  • Hooks are properly typed:
    • useMutation<DATA_TYPE, VARIABLE_TYPE>(…)
    • useQuery<DATA_TYPE, VARIABLE_TYPE>(…)
    • useSubscription<DATA_TYPE, VARIABLE_TYPE>(…)
    • useMachine<CONTEXT_TYPE, EVENTS_TYPE>(…)
    • useState<STATE_TYPE>(…)
  • All components have a proper typing for their props
  • No useless optional chaining with ?. (if the GraphQL API specifies that a field cannot be null, do not treat it has potentially null for example)
  • Nullable values have a proper type (for example let diagram: Diagram | null = null;)

Backend

This section is not relevant if your contribution does not come with changes to the backend.

General purpose

  • Are all the event handlers tested?
  • Are the event processor tested?
  • Is the business code (services) tested?
  • Are diagram layout changes tested?

Architecture

  • Are data structure classes properly separated from behavioral classes?
  • Are all the relevant fields final?
  • Is any data structure mutable? If so, please write a comment indicating why
  • Are behavioral classes either stateless or side effect free?

Review

How to test this PR?

Please describe here the various use cases to test this pull request

  • Has the Kiwi TCMS test suite been updated with tests for this contribution?


It allows us to define our tests in JavaScript.
Given that we can use it in JavaScript, it should also be quite easy to integrate in our development process.
It should be quite easy for us to create custom npm packages to share utilirt services to reuse in other tests for downstream projects.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to share utility services

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@pcdavid pcdavid left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe it's out of scope for this particular ADR, but it's not clear to me where/how/when the tests will be executed.

I guess for a first iteration we simply need to get things running we can run everything locally on our dev machines, but this means the DB, the backend, and Gatling itself will run on the same host, competing for resources and avoiding all/most network-related costs.

@sbegaudeau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Maybe it's out of scope for this particular ADR, but it's not clear to me where/how/when the tests will be executed.

I have the same concerns and right know, I don't know. I just want to ensure that they are executed frequently on our CI to ensure that they are still working properly but to really extract some metrics that we can keep over time, we will have to figure it out. Maybe have a dedicated machine running Sirius Web somewhere to use as a target to run the test.

@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau force-pushed the sbe/specification/adr-performance-measurement branch from 50d40a4 to 15550f7 Compare March 27, 2026 09:05
@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau requested review from frouene and pcdavid March 27, 2026 09:05
@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau force-pushed the sbe/specification/adr-performance-measurement branch from 15550f7 to 434fae3 Compare March 27, 2026 13:30
Signed-off-by: Stéphane Bégaudeau <stephane.begaudeau@obeo.fr>
@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau force-pushed the sbe/specification/adr-performance-measurement branch from 434fae3 to 7b319a5 Compare March 27, 2026 13:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants