Unleash is being too reactive to events inside Unleash. We should not
update etag if feature is created or tag is added to feature.
This PR adds this condition and adds test for it.
Now we can receive custom metrics, return those for UI and have extra
prometheus endpoint for it.
---------
Co-authored-by: Christopher Kolstad <chriswk@getunleash.io>
Blocks deletion of context fields that are in use and updates the
"active usage" count to exclude use in archived flags.
- Before allowing you to delete a context field, checks if it is in use
by any strategies. If so, returns a 409 error.
- Updates what we count as "in use" to exclude flags that have been
archived.
BREAKING CHANGE: Context fields can no longer be deleted if they are in
use by active (non-archived) flags.
Vitest Pros:
* Automated failing test comments on github PRs
* A nice local UI with incremental testing when changing files (`yarn
test:ui`)
* Also nicely supported in all major IDEs, click to run test works (so
we won't miss what we had with jest).
* Works well with ESM
Vitest Cons:
* The ESBuild transformer vitest uses takes a little longer to transform
than our current SWC/jest setup, however, it is possible to setup SWC as
the transformer for vitest as well (though it only does one transform,
so we're paying ~7-10 seconds instead of ~ 2-3 seconds in transform
phase).
* Exposes how slow our tests are (tongue in cheek here)
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-3564/remove-filterexistingflagnames-feature-flag
We're removing the `filterExistingFlagNames` feature flag since we've
decided we want this to be the default behavior.
We don't need to rush to merge it, just in case we need to disable this
for any reason. However it should also be pretty easy to just revert if
needed.
Changes in tests are a bit tricky since they assumed the previous
behavior where we always registered metrics, even for non existing flag
names. `cachedFeatureNames` is also memoized with a TTL of 10s, so the
easiest way to overcome this was to override `cachedFeatureNames` to
return what we expected. As long as they return the same flag names that
we expect, we're able to register their metrics.
Let me know if you can think of a better approach.
Improves handling of constraints in use that have been deleted.
This change implments a few small changes on both the front and the back
end on how we deal with constraints that have been deleted.
The most important change is on the back end, in the
`/constraints/validate` endpoint. We used to throw here if the
constraint couldn't be found, but the only reason we wanted to look for
the constraint in the db was to check for legal values. Now, instead,
we'll allow you to pass a constraint field that doesn't exist in the
database. We'll still check the values against the operator for
validity, we just don't control legal values anymore (because there
aren't any).
On the front end, we improve the handling by showing the deleted context
filed in the dropdown, both when the selector dropdown is closed and
when it is open. However, if you change the context field, we remove the
deleted field from the list. This seems like a sensible tradeoff. Means
you can't select it if you've deselected it.
We're migrating to ESM, which will allow us to import the latest
versions of our dependencies.
Co-Authored-By: Christopher Kolstad <chriswk@getunleash.io>
Add `getProjectLinkTemplates` method to ProjectStore and corresponding
test. Ideally this should be in a read-model, but let's finish link
templates end to end
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-3406/hold-unknown-flags-in-memory-and-show-them-in-the-ui-somehow
This PR introduces a suggestion for a “unknown flags” feature.
When clients report metrics for flags that don’t exist in Unleash (e.g.
due to typos), we now track a limited set of these unknown flag names
along with the appnames that reported them. The goal is to help users
identify and clean up incorrect flag usage across their apps.
We store up to 10 unknown flag + appName combinations, keeping only the
most recent reports. Data is collected in-memory and flushed
periodically to the DB, with deduplication and merging to ensure we
don’t exceed the cap even across pods.
We were especially careful to make this implementation defensive, as
unknown flags could be reported in very high volumes. Writes are
batched, deduplicated, and hard-capped to avoid DB pressure.
No UI has been added yet — this is backend-only for now and intended as
a step toward better visibility into client misconfigurations.
I would suggest starting with a simple banner that opens a dialog
showing the list of unknown flags and which apps reported them.
<img width="497" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b7348e0d-0163-4be4-a7f8-c072e8464331"
/>
## About the changes
Initially at Unleash we started using `process.nextTick` inside
constructors to delay initialization of services.
Later we stared using a pattern where we instantiate services multiple
times.
The problem is the first pattern implies we have singleton services,
while the second pattern breaks the singleton.
There are reasons for both patterns, but we've decided that
`process.nextTick` inside constructors is not something we want to keep
as it creates side effects from creating objects. Instead this PR
proposes a more explicit approach.
Fixes#9775
This test was flaky once an hour because subminutes 3 made it fall into
the wrong bucket when tests were run exactly or minutes after the our
had passed.
Also, the databases created were created with the system clock. I
altered it to be explicitly UTC.
As part of preparation for ESM and node/TSC updates, this PR will make
Unleash build with strictNullChecks set to true, since that's what's in
our tsconfig file. Hence, this PR also removes the `--strictNullChecks
false` flag in our compile tasks in package.json.
TL;DR - Clean up your code rather than turning off compiler security
features :)
## About the changes
Some automation may keep some data up-to-date (e.g. segments). These
updates sometimes don't generate changes but we're still storing these
events in the event log and triggering reactions to those events.
Arguably, this could be done in each service domain logic, but it seems
to be a pretty straightforward solution: if preData and data are
provided, it means some change happened. Other events that don't have
preData or don't have data are treated as before.
Tests were added to validate we don't break other events.
## About the changes
Based on the first hypothesis from
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/9264, I decided to find an
alternative way of initializing the DB, mainly trying to run migrations
only once and removing that from the actual test run.
I found in [Postgres template
databases](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/manage-ag-templatedbs.html)
an interesting option in combination with jest global initializer.
### Changes on how we use DBs for testing
Previously, we were relying on a single DB with multiple schemas to
isolate tests, but each schema was empty and required migrations or
custom DB initialization scripts.
With this method, we don't need to use different schema names
(apparently there's no templating for schemas), and we can use new
databases. We can also eliminate custom initialization code.
### Legacy tests
This method also highlighted some wrong assumptions in existing tests.
One example is the existence of `default` environment, that because of
being deprecated is no longer available, but because tests are creating
the expected db state manually, they were not updated to match the
existing db state.
To keep tests running green, I've added a configuration to use the
`legacy` test setup (24 tests). By migrating these, we'll speed up
tests, but the code of these tests has to be modified, so I leave this
for another PR.
## Downsides
1. The template db initialization happens at the beginning of any test,
so local development may suffer from slower unit tests. As a workaround
we could define an environment variable to disable the db migration
2. Proliferation of test dbs. In ephemeral environments, this is not a
problem, but for local development we should clean up from time to time.
There's the possibility of cleaning up test dbs using the db name as a
pattern:
2ed2e1c274/scripts/jest-setup.ts (L13-L18)
but I didn't want to add this code yet. Opinions?
## Benefits
1. It allows us migrate only once and still get the benefits of having a
well known state for tests.
3. It removes some of the custom setup for tests (which in some cases
ends up testing something not realistic)
4. It removes the need of testing migrations:
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/blob/main/src/test/e2e/migrator.e2e.test.ts
as migrations are run at the start
5. Forces us to keep old tests up to date when we modify our database
This is implementing the segments events for delta API. Previous version
of delta API, we were just sending all of the segments. Now we will have
`segment-updated` and `segment-removed `events coming to SDK.
