Closed Bug 1651483 Opened 5 years ago Closed 5 years ago

Glean: Enable application id org.mozilla.eng_workflow.build.glean.testing

Categories

(Data Platform and Tools :: General, task)

Product:
Data Platform and Tools
Component:
General
Type:
task

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: mhentges, Unassigned)

References

Details

I'm setting up build telemetry to use Glean, but I'm still in the investigation and iteration phase.
Can we temporarily enable the org.mozilla.eng_workflow.build.glean.testing application ID?

Flags: needinfo?(mreid)
See Also: → 1651424
Flags: needinfo?(mreid) → needinfo?(fbertsch)

Hey Mitchell,

Thanks for the bug report! Can you clarify what you'll use the testing application for? This will do a full-scale deploy of new endpoints for our metrics API, new tables in BigQuery, and more, so we have hesitated to add short-term use cases to that.

You shouldn't really have to worry about data getting through the pipeline anymore - Glean is automated, tried and true. If you want to see the pings you're sending, you can instead use the debug ping viewer.

Flags: needinfo?(fbertsch) → needinfo?(mhentges)

Hey Frank!

I'm seeing my pings in the debug ping viewer, but I'd like to be able to test my metrics end-to-end before landing my changes.
I'd like to be able to answer some questions, like:

  • I have a number value I'd like to measure (CPU utilization over a build), but I can't use the "Quantity" metric type because I'm not GeckoView. I've used the "string" metric type, but I'm not sure if this will be query-able enough
  • There's nested data structures - I'd like to see how manageable these are in BigQuery
  • There may be other "unknown unknowns" that will be found if I can end-to-end test in advance
Flags: needinfo?(mhentges) → needinfo?(fbertsch)

Hmm, if it's not ideal to set up short-term testing data to go through the whole pipeline, would it be OK if I pinged a glean team member for review before landing the telemetry I'm implementing?

I'm mostly worried about my integration with glean being incorrect. Having some peace of mind there would definitely alleviate my concerns :)

(In reply to Mitchell Hentges [:mhentges] 🦀 from comment #3)

Hmm, if it's not ideal to set up short-term testing data to go through the whole pipeline, would it be OK if I pinged a glean team member for review before landing the telemetry I'm implementing?

This is a great idea - Alessio would you mind reviewing?

Flags: needinfo?(alessio.placitelli)

(In reply to Mark Reid [:mreid] from comment #4)

(In reply to Mitchell Hentges [:mhentges] 🦀 from comment #3)

Hmm, if it's not ideal to set up short-term testing data to go through the whole pipeline, would it be OK if I pinged a glean team member for review before landing the telemetry I'm implementing?

This is a great idea - Alessio would you mind reviewing?

Hi Mitchell, we're more than happy to provide early review there. Please flag me (or anyone else on the Glean team) for assistance!

Flags: needinfo?(alessio.placitelli)

Perfect, thanks, I'll give you a shout when it's ready!

Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 5 years ago
Flags: needinfo?(fbertsch)
Resolution: --- → FIXED

(In reply to Mitchell Hentges [:mhentges] 🦀 from comment #6)

Perfect, thanks, I'll give you a shout when it's ready!

I'm also fine with taking a very early look to help shape the final thing if needed! Your call!

You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.