[NoQA] [Reassure] SearchPage perf tests #33872

rinej · 2024-01-03T15:47:01Z

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #33229

PROPOSAL:
Added reassure perf tests to the SearchPage component

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
- I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
- I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
- I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
- I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
- I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
- I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  - If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

OlimpiaZurek · 2024-01-15T08:27:51Z

tests/perf-test/SearchPage.perf-test.js

+
+const mockedReports = getMockedReportsMap(600);
+const mockedBetas = _.values(CONST.BETAS);
+const mockedPersonalDetails = LHNTestUtils.fakePersonalDetails;


How about using createPersonalDetails from utils/collections here?

sure, I will refactor it

OlimpiaZurek · 2024-01-15T16:43:57Z

tests/perf-test/SearchPage.perf-test.js

+    return _.assign({}, ...mockReports);
+};
+
+const getMockedPersonalDetailsMap = (length) => {


Instead of creating getMockedPersonalDetailsMap we can use createCollection. Take a look at docs . Same with getMockedReportsMap

melvin-bot · 2024-01-16T11:02:30Z

@ Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

rinej · 2024-01-17T16:30:53Z

Hello @mountiny could you assign someone from Expensify for review?
It is part of the #33229 ticket - adding more reassure tests

mountiny · 2024-01-18T02:35:25Z

Yeah I can review

For future, the issues need to be linked exactly like this:
$ https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/33229

you were missing a space so thats why I was not assigned

mountiny · 2024-01-18T16:31:10Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
- I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

N/A automated tests

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

mountiny

@rinej small comments!

mountiny · 2024-01-18T16:31:41Z

src/pages/SearchPage.js

@@ -33,16 +33,19 @@ const propTypes = {

    /** Whether we are searching for reports in the server */
    isSearchingForReports: PropTypes.bool,
+
+    navigation: PropTypes.shape({}),


Can you please add a comment here to adhere with the style rules. Thanks!

ideally noting this is for automated tests

sure, will do

mountiny · 2024-01-18T16:32:58Z

tests/perf-test/SearchPage.perf-test.js

+ * This is a helper function to create a mock for the addListener function of the react-navigation library.
+ * Same approach as in ReportScreen.perf-test.js
+ *
+ * P.S: This can't be moved to a utils file because Jest wants any external function to stay in the scope.


Is there really no way to share such methods across Jest tests?

I moved it to TestHelper file and tests worked properly :)

mountiny

Thank you @rinej

OSBotify · 2024-01-19T15:52:25Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

OSBotify · 2024-01-21T23:14:07Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.29-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	failure ❌
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	cancelled 🔪
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

OSBotify · 2024-01-21T23:44:16Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.4.29-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

OSBotify · 2024-01-23T04:26:09Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.29-1 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

rinej added 5 commits January 3, 2024 16:30

feat: initial SearchPage reassure tests setup

d6159ca

feat: added reassure tests for SearchPage

2e5041e

feat: add reassure tests for SearchPage, mock navigation

e840140

Merge branch 'main' into feat/SearchPage-reassure-perf-tests

e13f88e

refactor: fix prettier and typo

db3f77d

OlimpiaZurek reviewed Jan 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

rinej added 2 commits January 15, 2024 15:50

refactor: use different method for mocking personal data

c8b23a5

feat: create larger personal detail list

e1a73ab

rinej requested a review from OlimpiaZurek January 15, 2024 15:13

OlimpiaZurek reviewed Jan 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

refactor: use createCollection for mocking colections

bddd3b6

rinej requested a review from OlimpiaZurek January 16, 2024 09:20

hurali97 approved these changes Jan 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

rinej marked this pull request as ready for review January 16, 2024 11:02

rinej requested a review from a team as a code owner January 16, 2024 11:02

melvin-bot bot removed request for a team and OlimpiaZurek January 16, 2024 11:02

rinej changed the title ~~[Reassure] SearchPage perf tests setup~~ [Reassure] SearchPage perf tests Jan 17, 2024

mountiny self-requested a review January 18, 2024 02:34

mountiny assigned rinej Jan 18, 2024

mountiny requested changes Jan 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

refactor: move createAddListenerMock to separate file, add comments

34b2c49

rinej requested a review from mountiny January 19, 2024 15:36

mountiny approved these changes Jan 19, 2024

View reviewed changes

mountiny changed the title ~~[Reassure] SearchPage perf tests~~ [NoQA] [Reassure] SearchPage perf tests Jan 19, 2024

mountiny merged commit bc3705e into Expensify:main Jan 19, 2024
17 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jan 21, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-01-21 #34864

Closed

17 tasks

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Jan 23, 2024

[Performance] Implement more reassure tests #33229

Closed

34 tasks

tgolen mentioned this pull request Jan 30, 2024

Allow users to permanently dismiss the referral banners #34842

Merged

50 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[NoQA] [Reassure] SearchPage perf tests #33872

[NoQA] [Reassure] SearchPage perf tests #33872

rinej commented Jan 3, 2024 •

edited by mountiny

Loading

OlimpiaZurek Jan 15, 2024

rinej Jan 15, 2024

OlimpiaZurek Jan 15, 2024

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 16, 2024

rinej commented Jan 17, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 18, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mountiny left a comment

mountiny Jan 18, 2024

mountiny Jan 18, 2024

rinej Jan 19, 2024

mountiny Jan 18, 2024

rinej Jan 19, 2024

mountiny left a comment

OSBotify commented Jan 19, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 21, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 21, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 23, 2024

[NoQA] [Reassure] SearchPage perf tests #33872

[NoQA] [Reassure] SearchPage perf tests #33872

Conversation

rinej commented Jan 3, 2024 • edited by mountiny Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 16, 2024

rinej commented Jan 17, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 18, 2024

mountiny commented Jan 18, 2024 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Jan 19, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 21, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 21, 2024

OSBotify commented Jan 23, 2024

rinej commented Jan 3, 2024 •

edited by mountiny

Loading

mountiny commented Jan 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading