2019-07-24 TC Meeting notes
Date
7am PST / 4pm CEST
Meeting Link
Attendees
Discussion items
Time | Item | Who | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
5m | Agenda and action item review | Josh Zamor | |
20m | De-centralized lot management | Sebastian Brudziński |
|
15m | Performance tests | Sebastian Brudziński |
|
20m | Look at streaming from Casper | Chongsun Ahn (Unlicensed) |
|
3m | UI caching design - call for reviews | Sebastian Brudziński |
|
Notes
Decentralized Lot Management
- Current implementation is to manage items and lots centrally, there's one admin right for both of these.
- data quality was the big reason to choose this
- Angola needs:
- not centralized
- each user managing stock at the facility could manage lots as they go
- through the physical inventory and receive processes
- search first, then add lot as they go if it doesn't exist
- Need something before next core release
- What's the minimum working version that'd be accepted in core
- configuration option to select either centralized or not-centralized
- keep the boundaries between ref data and stock mgmt correct
- in Angola it'd be a UI and right change (split), in core we'd likely want this to be more comprehensive
- seems like lots would need to be created before a stock event could be fully processed, as a lot id is part of the stock event data
- strategy for de-duplication:
- report for mgmt to find dupes
- stock events and stock line items are written in stone - they can't change. We should keep this in mind that UPDATE on certain tables are not allowed.
Performance tests
- They've been failing since forever
- Sometimes a test starts to fail, it could be a problem in starting ref data, could be a red herring, could be an actual failure of not meeting criteria
- functional tests don't seem to be having the same issues.
- Not many days that performance tests pass, see link above
- oftentimes the results vary wildly between runs
- What we've done:
- warmup phase
- What value do we have for these tests?
- Perhaps none
- The small bumps every 5 builds, 10 builds, etc add up to a failure for the test suite almost all the time.
- To make them valuable:
- We could continue playing the raise the limit game
- We could look at trend lines instead of pass/fail indicators
- Perhaps none
- Want to revisit this topic, we'll create a ticket and brainstorm ideas for improve reliability
Casper
- Migration from v2 to v3 over a long period of time so that users don't face a hard-switch point
- Focused on moving Requisitions between systems
- One way data pipeline
- could this be both ways? yes, the main work is in building the transformation steps in Nifi, so quite possible.
- Another use case could be:
- in onboarding to v3, we could use a bi-way flow that would allow users to start using v3, and if they encounter a bug they could fall back to v2.
- Using data-pumps and Nifi
- Kafka
- Debezium
- Nifi
- Kafka Connect
- Saw data streaming out of v2 and into v3 in near-real-time
- Want to move this tech into our reporting stack
- How resilient is the tech? Is it mature?
- Restarting the stack is working, pieces can be brought down without the whole thing falling down
- Could be used for reporting pretty easily
- How resilient is the tech? Is it mature?
UI Caching
- Nikodem Graczewski (Unlicensed) has a great writeup
- Feedback is much appreciated!
Action Items
- Josh Zamor to look at caching document
OpenLMIS: the global initiative for powerful LMIS software