## About the changes
Add partial index on events by announced. This should help avoid `Seq
Scan on events` when the majority of events are announced=true
---
Co-authored-by: Ivar Østhus <ivar@getunleash.io>
Co-authored-by: Gard Rimestad <gard@getunleash.io>
# Simplify package scripts
This PR's purpose is to raise a discussion surrounding our current
package scripts.
It includes some suggestions that aim to simplify the scripts and
hopefully bring a much more straightforward approach to developing and
contributing to Unleash.
Building (prod) should only happen **explicitly** and when needed.
## Before PR (current behavior)
- Clone the project;
- Open 2 terminals: One for `unleash` and another for
`unleash/frontend`;
- On `unleash`:
- Run `yarn` (which will also build, for some reason?);
- Run `yarn start:dev` to start backend in dev mode (`tsc-watch`);
- On `unleash/frontend`:
- Run `yarn` (which will also build, for some reason?);
- Run `yarn start` to start frontend in dev mode (`vite`);
So it seems to me like we build unnecessarily every time we install
dependencies. Neither dev scripts need to build the project, as backend
uses `tsc-watch` and frontend uses `vite`. I'm unsure why this is the
case, as building can take a very long time.
There's also some complexity in the way we need to split the terminal to
`cd` into `frontend` and treat it as a different project. The fact that
we have different script names is also confusing (`yarn start`, `yarn
start:dev`, etc).
## After PR
- Clone the project;
- Run `yarn` to install all dependencies;
- Run `yarn dev` to get started developing Unleash;
Running `yarn` should take care of everything needed to start
developing. This includes installing dependencies for frontend as well.
It should not build projects if we are not being explicit about it,
especially since we don't need to build them at this stage.
Running `yarn dev` should start the project in dev mode. This means
running both projects in `dev` mode, which for `backend` means running
`tsc-watch` and for `frontend` means running `vite`.
Here this PR attempts to provide a better DX by using
[concurrently](https://www.npmjs.com/package/concurrently) and
[wait-on](https://www.npmjs.com/package/wait-on) - This means both tasks
are ran simultaneously, stdout is labeled accordingly, and are stopped
together. It also means that `frontend` waits for `backend` to be
serving at `4242` before starting, since `frontend` starts pretty much
immediately with `vite` and `backend` takes a bit longer. Of course,
when the `backend` is hot-reloading you may still find some
`ECONNREFUSED`s on `frontend` stdout while it recompiles.
No more splitting your terminal and treating `frontend` as a separate
project.
## Discussion points
Maybe there's a better alternative to `tsc-watch`? I briefly explored
some alternatives and while they had a much faster starting speed,
hot-reload was sometimes slower. IMO we should aspire to run
`src/server-dev.ts` directly and only compile when needed.
Running `dev:backend` still serves a version of the frontend (at 4242).
**Why? Can we remove that behavior?**
I can't imagine a scenario in dev where we wouldn't want to run the
latest version of the frontend with `vite`.
~~**Note:** This PR removes all other out-of-scope scripts to focus on
this revamp. If we decide to merge it, we should evaluate what other
existing scripts we still want to include. May be a good opportunity to
clean up unused ones and only include the ones we really use. This
includes scripts that our GH actions rely on.~~
**Update:** In an effort to minimize impact surface of this PR and make
it a bit more ready for merging:
- It updates some docs in
2a4ff805e8
and
1bbc488251
to reflect our new simplified flow;
- It includes the old package scripts for now in
039bc04699;
- It updates some of our GH actions to reflect the new scripts in
7782cb9b12;
Given its current status I'll promote the PR to "ready for review".
I still think we should have a second look at our existing scripts and
GH actions to see what we really need and/or should adapt, but it should
be a team effort so we have a broader context. Maybe on a follow-up PR.
Does this require any changes to related projects (e.g. Enterprise)?
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
## About the changes
This enables strictNullChecks which will give us nice hints in our IDEs
to avoid introducing more and hopefully will encourage us to fix some of
the existing problems.
Also:
1. The compiler explicitly ignores these errors
2. The "null checks action" still verifies we're not introducing new
ones.
The combination of these two things should help us to reduce the number
of nulls
For testing that the action still works (cause it was modified), [a
commit](5c4b818d1a)
was added introducing a bunch of null check errors:
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/actions/runs/4364648191/jobs/7632224720
## About the changes
This is a small improvement adding more context to the comment message
when this action fails.
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
## About the changes
- Actions are not counting successfully:
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/actions/runs/4181713524/jobs/7243938807#step:5:17
- This should fix an issue with running yarn concurrently (which might
be leading to the zero counts)
- Move the code to a GH action so it's easier to debug
- Added a diff of the reported errors to help the PR author identify the
potential cause
