Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[tda] Critical Experiences - switch to 24 hour cycle #668

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

realkosty
Copy link
Collaborator

This should make graphs a little smoother
If this is not enough we can switch to 6-day cycle (or 14/30-day to match what SE will often have as time interval during demos)
Eventually we want this to be on a 6 week cycle to match releases (can now be overlayed in dashboards)

Copy link

vercel bot commented Jan 24, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

1 Skipped Deployment
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
empower ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Jan 24, 2025 1:26am

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 24, 2025

Bundle Report

Bundle size has no change ✅

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 24, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 34.13%. Comparing base (76731e7) to head (67c2912).

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #668   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   34.13%   34.13%           
=======================================
  Files          37       37           
  Lines         920      920           
  Branches      111      111           
=======================================
  Hits          314      314           
  Misses        589      589           
  Partials       17       17           
Flag Coverage Δ
api 6.59% <ø> (ø)
frontend 54.75% <ø> (ø)
Components Coverage Δ
checkout_module 6.59% <ø> (ø)
product_component 56.41% <ø> (ø)

Copy link
Contributor

@gid-sentry gid-sentry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Curious on why the change to // rather than %

Wouldn't this make the probabilities that come up look less random?

Hour now.hour // 4 now.hour % 4 Same?
0 0 0 Yes
1 0 1 No
2 0 2 No
3 0 3 No
4 1 0 No
5 1 1 No
6 1 2 No
7 1 3 No
8 2 0 No
9 2 1 No
10 2 2 No
11 2 3 No
12 3 0 No
13 3 1 No
14 3 2 No
15 3 3 No
16 4 0 No
17 4 1 No
18 4 2 No
19 4 3 No
20 5 0 No
21 5 1 No
22 5 2 No
23 5 3 No

Though % 4 will not come up to 5 by nature. It would be more cyclical though, right?

@realkosty
Copy link
Collaborator Author

realkosty commented Jan 24, 2025

hey @gid-sentry
my goal was to keep the same kind of cycle just make each segment longer

Before
5 segments (1h or 2h each) taking 6 hours to fully cycle

After
5 segments(4h or 8h each) taking 24 hours for full cycle

that way we'd just have more datapoints => less noise, spikes etc.

Wouldn't this make the probabilities that come up look less random?

there are no probabilities now or after the change, entirely deterministic
honestly I think the current story is complex enough so it's already easy to get lost in it trying to understand what's what there, random segment durations would get us lost in it entirely IMO

Copy link
Contributor

@gid-sentry gid-sentry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah that makes sense - lgtm

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants