[NoQA] Chore: Analytics - split `SWITCH_REPORT` event #46966

kacper-mikolajczak · 2024-08-07T13:12:21Z

Details

In this PR, SWITCH_REPORT is being divided into fine grained events in order to get better analytics result and fix event flooding issue.

Current changes are:

SWITCH_REPORT_THREAD
SWITCH_REPORT_FROM_PREVIEW
remove SWITCH_REPORT from ReportActionItemParentAction - it was probably the reason we've got so high timing results, because it was not properly closed
REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER removed - incorrect implementation

Fixed Issues

$ #46965
PROPOSAL: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C05LX9D6E07/p1722451784265129

Tests

INTERNAL QA

Check the App Timing dashboard and confirm these new events are reporting properly.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
- I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
- I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
- I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
- I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
- I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
- I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  - If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

kacper-mikolajczak · 2024-08-07T13:55:45Z

SWITCH_REPORT_THREAD_GO_BACK - does not work because the previous screen is not re-rendered

Right now we only measured opening of the reports (different ones like threads, previews but still just openings). With THREAD_GO_BACK it's quite different because we are not unmounting previous screen, so onLayout is not triggered (on this event we are finishing the measurements).

⚠️ Moreover, we are also leaking the event timing which is going to provide incorrect timings (might be the reason of reported high timings):

Screen.Recording.2024-08-07.at.15.49.25.mov

With that in mind, I'd consider removing this event for now and consider improving current approach in general (e.g. event invalidation when we are out of some scope like a specific report). It is out of the scope of this PR so I will revert the SWITCH_REPORT_THREAD_GO_BACK event and let's continue to work on this separately 👍

CC @mountiny @adhorodyski

melvin-bot · 2024-08-07T13:58:10Z

@rojiphil Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

MrRefactor

Please fix linter, lgtm

mountiny · 2024-08-08T10:31:57Z

@hannojg do you use these flags in the E2E tests? Is it ok to change it from that perspective

mountiny · 2024-08-08T10:33:08Z

@kacper-mikolajczak if this is noqa can you please mark it as such in the title?

hannojg · 2024-08-08T10:59:33Z

@mountiny yeah I think that will break e2e tests - @kirillzyusko what do you think?

kacper-mikolajczak · 2024-08-08T12:01:45Z

While working on the PR I have found one occurrence of TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT in e2e test in linkingTest.e2e.ts:

App/src/libs/E2E/tests/linkingTest.e2e.ts

Lines 56 to 82 in 0926267

    
           Performance.subscribeToMeasurements((entry) => { 
        
               if (entry.name === CONST.TIMING.SIDEBAR_LOADED) { 
        
                   console.debug('[E2E] Sidebar loaded, navigating to a report…'); 
        
                   Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID.getRoute(reportID)); 
        
                   return; 
        
               } 
        
               if (entry.name === CONST.TIMING.REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER) { 
        
                   console.debug('[E2E] Navigating to linked report action…'); 
        
                   Timing.start(CONST.TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT); 
        
                   Performance.markStart(CONST.TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT); 
        
                   Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID.getRoute(linkedReportID, linkedReportActionID)); 
        
                   return; 
        
               } 
        
               if (entry.name === CONST.TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT) { 
        
                   console.debug('[E2E] Linking: 1'); 
        
                   E2EClient.submitTestResults({ 
        
                       branch: Config.E2E_BRANCH, 
        
                       name: 'Comment linking', 
        
                       metric: entry.duration, 
        
                       unit: 'ms', 
        
                   }); 
        
                   switchReportResolve();

The original TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT remains untouched so this flow should be fine.

If you could indeed check that @kirillzyusko. Much appreciated! ❤️

rojiphil · 2024-08-08T12:40:37Z

One curious observation is that we end the timer for REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER when we have not started the timer for the same. Though not directly related to the changes made thus far, did we miss adding the start timer for REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER?

App/src/pages/home/report/ReportActionsView.tsx

Line 451 in 0926267

Timing.end(CONST.TIMING.REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER);

adhorodyski · 2024-08-08T13:17:11Z

One curious observation is that we end the timer for REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER when we have not started the timer for the same. Though not directly related to the changes made thus far, did we miss adding the start timer for REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER?

App/src/pages/home/report/ReportActionsView.tsx

Line 451 in 0926267

Timing.end(CONST.TIMING.REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER);

Wild take, but what about removing this one all together? I don't believe it's something with a super clear definition, to me it's more challenging to understand it and it's value than all the other ones that actually point to specific actions (we know when they start & finish).

adhorodyski · 2024-08-08T13:21:39Z

I think I'd also vote for getting rid of the SWITCH_REPORT_THREAD_GO_BACK - there's eg a native Android's back action that we don't include, and overall the 'Back' action will almost all the time just be fast because it's already on the stack (we're not dealing with the mount). What potentially lags here is just the animation which isn't something we care about (this much) in here.

Overall, I think we should track aggressively for the 'visiting' action in all scenarios, and skip the 'Back' (visit) which already happened with all the heavy operations that occurred the 1st time when mounting a Report screen.

We also can always think about bringing it back here if it proves to be problematic at any point :)

adhorodyski · 2024-08-08T14:17:13Z

@mountiny curious of your take on this one

kirillzyusko · 2024-08-08T16:46:21Z

@mountiny yeah I think that will break e2e tests - @kirillzyusko what do you think?

I think it shouldn't break e2e test - in this PR @kacper-mikolajczak changed only Timing usage, but in e2e tests we depend on Performance 🤷‍♂️

However if you want I can checkout this branch tomorrow and run test locally to see if they pass or not 👀

I see the usage of Timing.start(CONST.TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT); but I don't understand its purpose there - I think the best way here is to check if e2e tests will actually work after these changes locally. I can help to test it tomorrow if you want 👍

mountiny · 2024-08-08T22:52:03Z

@adhorodyski I like that, I think it makes sense to prioritize the visiting actions over going back.

Timing.end(CONST.TIMING.REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER);

Yeah, if we do not start it anywhere we can remove it, nobody seems to be using it so nobody will miss it.

kacper-mikolajczak · 2024-08-09T08:47:01Z

CONST.TIMING.REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER removed!

@mountiny PR is ready to be merged 🫡

src/pages/home/report/ReportActionItemParentAction.tsx

src/pages/home/report/ThreadDivider.tsx

rojiphil · 2024-08-09T09:01:20Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
- I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

NA

MacOS: Desktop

NA

iOS: mWeb Safari

NA

Android: Native

NA

Android: mWeb Chrome

NA

iOS: Native

NA

rojiphil

Code changes are straightforward. LGTM. Thanks.

kacper-mikolajczak · 2024-08-09T09:52:28Z

[Sidequest]
Hey folks, if you could take a look at this idea as well: #47142 🙏

rojiphil · 2024-08-09T17:24:21Z

Hey folks, if you could take a look at this idea as well: #47142 🙏

Well! Currently, it looks like the term OPEN_REPORT is used distinctly to refer to opening the report by clicking on the LHN row. At all other places, we are currently considering this as SWITCH_REPORT. If this distinction is meaningless, I think it makes sense to go ahead with a common usage of term OPEN_REPORT

App/src/components/LHNOptionsList/OptionRowLHN.tsx

Line 148 in 55ea2f8

Performance.markStart(CONST.TIMING.OPEN_REPORT);

rojiphil · 2024-08-09T17:40:30Z

src/pages/home/report/ReportActionItemThread.tsx

@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ function ReportActionItemThread({numberOfReplies, icons, mostRecentReply, childR
            <PressableWithSecondaryInteraction
                onPress={() => {
                    Report.navigateToAndOpenChildReport(childReportID);
-                    Timing.start(CONST.TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT);
+                    Timing.start(CONST.TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT_THREAD);


And, by the way, why do we start the timer after initiating a navigation? Shouldn't we call Timing.start before navigateToAndOpenChildReport? And could this be the reason for the high timings in the graph?

I think we can discuss but its NAB for this PR

@mountiny Do you think we can create another issue for this and discuss? Or if there is another related issue on analytics we can add this issue there and discuss.

mountiny

Thanks!

mountiny · 2024-08-11T23:08:11Z

src/pages/home/report/ReportActionItemThread.tsx

@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ function ReportActionItemThread({numberOfReplies, icons, mostRecentReply, childR
            <PressableWithSecondaryInteraction
                onPress={() => {
                    Report.navigateToAndOpenChildReport(childReportID);
-                    Timing.start(CONST.TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT);
+                    Timing.start(CONST.TIMING.SWITCH_REPORT_THREAD);


I think we can discuss but its NAB for this PR

OSBotify · 2024-08-11T23:26:20Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

mountiny · 2024-08-14T22:28:33Z

This is now being sent

kacper-mikolajczak added 5 commits August 7, 2024 14:17

SWITCH_REPORT_THREAD_GO_BACK

b66f490

SWITCH_REPORT_THREAD

ee733d8

remove SWITCH_REPORT from ReportActionItemParentAction

5263c00

SWITCH_REPORT_FROM_PREVIEW

a58504e

fix linter

dfcd68e

remove SWITCH_REPORT_THREAD_GO_BACK

366d842

kacper-mikolajczak marked this pull request as ready for review August 7, 2024 13:58

kacper-mikolajczak requested a review from a team as a code owner August 7, 2024 13:58

melvin-bot bot requested review from rojiphil and removed request for a team August 7, 2024 13:58

MrRefactor approved these changes Aug 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix linter

b2f59d9

mountiny self-requested a review August 8, 2024 10:32

kacper-mikolajczak changed the title ~~Chore: Analytics - split SWITCH_REPORT event~~ [NoQA] Chore: Analytics - split SWITCH_REPORT event Aug 8, 2024

mountiny assigned kacper-mikolajczak Aug 8, 2024

remove REPORT_INITIAL_RENDER

15ec109

adhorodyski reviewed Aug 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

src/pages/home/report/ReportActionItemParentAction.tsx Show resolved Hide resolved

adhorodyski reviewed Aug 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

src/pages/home/report/ThreadDivider.tsx Show resolved Hide resolved

rojiphil approved these changes Aug 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

rojiphil reviewed Aug 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

mountiny approved these changes Aug 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit 0341c3b into Expensify:main Aug 11, 2024
23 of 26 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Aug 12, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-08-12 #47219

Closed

90 tasks

marcaaron added the InternalQA This pull request required internal QA label Aug 12, 2024

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[NoQA] Chore: Analytics - split `SWITCH_REPORT` event #46966

[NoQA] Chore: Analytics - split `SWITCH_REPORT` event #46966

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 7, 2024 •

edited by marcaaron

Loading

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 7, 2024

MrRefactor left a comment

mountiny commented Aug 8, 2024

mountiny commented Aug 8, 2024

hannojg commented Aug 8, 2024

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 8, 2024

rojiphil commented Aug 8, 2024

adhorodyski commented Aug 8, 2024

adhorodyski commented Aug 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

adhorodyski commented Aug 8, 2024

kirillzyusko commented Aug 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mountiny commented Aug 8, 2024

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 9, 2024

rojiphil commented Aug 9, 2024

rojiphil left a comment

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 9, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rojiphil commented Aug 9, 2024

rojiphil Aug 9, 2024

mountiny Aug 11, 2024

rojiphil Aug 13, 2024

mountiny left a comment

mountiny Aug 11, 2024

OSBotify commented Aug 11, 2024

mountiny commented Aug 14, 2024

[NoQA] Chore: Analytics - split SWITCH_REPORT event #46966

[NoQA] Chore: Analytics - split SWITCH_REPORT event #46966

Conversation

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 7, 2024 • edited by marcaaron Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 7, 2024 • edited Loading

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 7, 2024

MrRefactor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny commented Aug 8, 2024

mountiny commented Aug 8, 2024

hannojg commented Aug 8, 2024

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 8, 2024

rojiphil commented Aug 8, 2024

adhorodyski commented Aug 8, 2024

adhorodyski commented Aug 8, 2024 • edited Loading

adhorodyski commented Aug 8, 2024

kirillzyusko commented Aug 8, 2024 • edited Loading

mountiny commented Aug 8, 2024

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 9, 2024

rojiphil commented Aug 9, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

rojiphil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 9, 2024 • edited Loading

rojiphil commented Aug 9, 2024

rojiphil Aug 9, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny Aug 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rojiphil Aug 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny Aug 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Aug 11, 2024

mountiny commented Aug 14, 2024

[NoQA] Chore: Analytics - split `SWITCH_REPORT` event #46966

[NoQA] Chore: Analytics - split `SWITCH_REPORT` event #46966

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 7, 2024 •

edited by marcaaron

Loading

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

adhorodyski commented Aug 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kirillzyusko commented Aug 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kacper-mikolajczak commented Aug 9, 2024 •

edited

Loading