Status Check - Report the overall status (accurately) #24027
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Overview -------- The page-footer includes a summary message about the system status (eg "System Status: Ok" or "System Status: Error"). The footer has inaccurately summarized the status. Before ------ Suppose you have 5 "Error" messages and 1 "OK" message. It will summarize as "System Status: Ok". (It emphasizes the *least severe* status-message.) Code is more complex. After ------ Suppose you have 5 "Error" messages and 1 "OK" message. It will summarize as "System Status: Error". (It emphasizes the *most severe* status-message.) Code is less complex. Comments -------- The overall value is determined in `CRM_Utils_Check::checkAll()`. Heretofore, `checkAll()` sorted the messages by severity and then emphasized the *first* visible message. The problem is that the sort-order has flip-flopped, so "first" means different things: * In v4.7, the messages were descending. So "first" was "most severe". * In v5.39 (11d593e), the order was ascending. So "first" was "least severe". (It appears accidental.) * In v5.45 (728c1cc), the order flipped back to descending, but *only* for the Angular (`civicrm/a/#/status`) -- not the footer. IMHO, the flip-floppiness means that callers cannot rely on the order returned by `checkAll()` -- they should instead do a higher-level sort (as in v5.45's 728c1cc). The `uasort()` within `checkAll()` is therefore redundant. We might as well skip it -- and simplify the logic.
|
(Standard links)
|
Co-authored-by: demeritcowboy <demeritcowboy@hotmail.com>
|
I agree with this simplification. Both APIv4 and APIv3 have their own sort/orderBy params which makes the order of the source data irrelevant. |
colemanw
added
the
merge ready
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Overview
The page-footer includes a summary message about the system status (eg "System Status: Ok" or "System Status: Error"). The footer has inaccurately summarized the status.
cc @seamuslee001 @mattwire
Before
Suppose you have 5 "Error" messages and 1 "OK" message. It will summarize as "System Status: Ok".
(It emphasizes the least severe status-message.)
Code is more complex.
After
Suppose you have 5 "Error" messages and 1 "OK" message. It will summarize as "System Status: Error".
(It emphasizes the most severe status-message.)
Code is less complex.
Comments
The overall value is determined in
CRM_Utils_Check::checkAll(). Heretofore,checkAll()sorted the messages by severity and then emphasized the first visible message.The problem is that the sort-order has flip-flopped, so "first" means different things:
civicrm/a/#/status). The footer still uses ascending order!IMHO, the flip-floppiness means that callers cannot rely on the order returned by
checkAll()-- they should instead do a higher-level sort (as in v5.45's 728c1cc). Theuasort()withincheckAll()is therefore redundant. We might as well skip it -- and simplify the logic.(The base-commit for this PR should be equally agreeable with
masteror5.52.)