feat/fe/infra monitor temp #1199
Conversation
ajhollid
requested review from
marcelluscaio,
shyna92,
gorkem-bwl and
jennifer-gan
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several enhancements across multiple components related to infrastructure monitoring. Key changes include the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 12
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (10)
Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.js (1)
57-60: Mom's spaghetti suggests some schema improvements! 🍝The new errors field is a good addition, but the schema design could be more robust.
Consider these improvements to the errorSchema:
const errorSchema = mongoose.Schema({ - metric: { type: [String], default: [] }, - err: { type: String, default: "" }, + metrics: { + type: [String], + validate: { + validator: function(v) { + return v.every(metric => ['cpu', 'memory', 'disk', 'temperature'].includes(metric)) + }, + message: 'Invalid metric type specified' + } + }, + errorMessage: { type: String, required: true }, + timestamp: { type: Date, default: Date.now }, + severity: { + type: String, + enum: ['warning', 'error', 'critical'], + required: true + } });This provides:
- Better field naming (err → errorMessage)
- Metric validation
- Timestamp tracking
- Error severity levels
Server/db/models/Notification.js (1)
53-67: Yo, let's make this code less heavy! 🍝The pre-save middleware works correctly but repeats the same logic four times. We can make it more maintainable with a simple refactor.
Here's a cleaner version that'll make your knees less weak:
-NotificationSchema.pre("save", function (next) { - if (!this.cpuAlertThreshold || this.isModified("alertThreshold")) { - this.cpuAlertThreshold = this.alertThreshold; - } - if (!this.memoryAlertThreshold || this.isModified("alertThreshold")) { - this.memoryAlertThreshold = this.alertThreshold; - } - if (!this.diskAlertThreshold || this.isModified("alertThreshold")) { - this.diskAlertThreshold = this.alertThreshold; - } - if (!this.tempAlertThreshold || this.isModified("alertThreshold")) { - this.tempAlertThreshold = this.alertThreshold; - } - next(); -}); +NotificationSchema.pre("save", function (next) { + const thresholdFields = ['cpu', 'memory', 'disk', 'temp']; + thresholdFields.forEach(field => { + const fieldName = `${field}AlertThreshold`; + if (!this[fieldName] || this.isModified("alertThreshold")) { + this[fieldName] = this.alertThreshold; + } + }); + next(); +});Client/src/Components/Charts/Utils/chartUtils.jsx (4)
65-65: Eh, let's make this percentage formatting more robust, buddy!While rounding to whole numbers looks great, we should handle edge cases. Consider adding a fallback for null/undefined values and maybe some bounds checking.
-{`${(payload?.value * 100).toFixed()}%`} +{`${payload?.value ? Math.max(0, Math.min(100, payload.value * 100)).toFixed() : 0}%`}
194-196: Take off, this formatCoreKey function could use some love!The helper function could be memoized since it's used in a mapping operation. Also, consider moving it outside the component to prevent recreation on each render.
+const formatCoreKey = memoize((key) => { + return key.replace(/^core(\d+)$/, "Core $1"); +}); export const TemperatureTooltip = ({ active, payload, label, keys, dotColor }) => { - const formatCoreKey = (key) => { - return key.replace(/^core(\d+)$/, "Core $1"); - };
257-257: Beauty, but what's this empty Typography component doing here?There's an empty Typography component that doesn't serve any purpose. We should either remove it or use it for something meaningful.
-<Typography component="span"></Typography>
221-261: This mapping operation could use some performance optimization, don't ya think?The mapping operation inside the render could benefit from some optimization:
- Consider using a memoized map operation
- Add a proper key structure
- Extract the styled components
Here's a suggestion for extracting the styled components:
const StyledStack = styled(Stack)(({ theme }) => ({ '& span': { color: theme.palette.text.tertiary, fontSize: 11, fontWeight: 500, }, })); // Then use it in your map: {keys.map((key) => ( <StyledStack key={`temp-${key}`} // ... rest of the props > // ... content </StyledStack> ))}Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/CreateMonitor/index.jsx (2)
35-36: Yo dawg, consider adding TypeScript or PropTypesThe new state properties follow the existing pattern, but without type definitions, we're one typo away from disaster. Adding TypeScript or PropTypes would help catch potential issues before they become problems in production.
Line range hint
1-385: Consider extracting monitor type configurationsThe addition of temperature monitoring with different units suggests we might benefit from a more abstract configuration approach. Consider creating a configuration object that defines properties for each monitor type.
const MONITOR_CONFIGS = { cpu: { unit: '%', label: 'CPU', validation: /* ... */ }, memory: { unit: '%', label: 'Memory', validation: /* ... */ }, disk: { unit: '%', label: 'Disk', validation: /* ... */ }, temperature: { unit: '°C', label: 'Temperature', validation: /* ... */ } };This would make adding new monitor types easier and ensure consistent handling across the component.
Server/validation/joi.js (1)
Yo! The editMonitorBodyValidation is missing thresholds support!
My palms are sweaty looking at this validation mismatch! While createMonitorBodyValidation includes full threshold support (including temperature), editMonitorBodyValidation is missing the entire thresholds object. Here's what we found:
- createMonitorBodyValidation has thresholds with usage_temperature
- editMonitorBodyValidation is missing the entire thresholds validation
- This means users can't update any thresholds post-creation 😰
Add this to editMonitorBodyValidation to match create validation:
thresholds: joi.object().keys({ usage_cpu: joi.number(), usage_memory: joi.number(), usage_disk: joi.number(), usage_temperature: joi.number(), }),🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
243-248: Heads up! We might be missing temperature validation in editMonitorBodyValidationMy knees are weak thinking about this, but we should probably add temperature threshold support to the edit monitor validation schema too. This would allow users to update temperature thresholds after monitor creation.
Let's check if the edit endpoint supports threshold updates:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if edit monitor endpoint handles threshold updates rg -l 'editMonitor.*threshold' --type jsLength of output: 42
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check the editMonitorBodyValidation schema definition ast-grep --pattern 'const editMonitorBodyValidation = joi.object({$$$})' # Also check for any temperature-related validation patterns rg -A 5 'temperature.*validation|threshold.*validation' --type js # Let's see the monitor routes to understand if temperature updates are supported rg -A 10 'router.(put|patch).*monitor' --type jsLength of output: 1191
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's check the create monitor validation schema to compare ast-grep --pattern 'const createMonitorBodyValidation = joi.object({$$$})' # And let's see if temperature thresholds are used in the edit monitor handler rg -A 10 'async function editMonitor' --type jsLength of output: 1233
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx (1)
544-553: Consider improving the chart layout for better responsivenessThe comments indicate a need for assistance with the layout styling in the area charts. To enhance responsiveness and maintainability, consider using
Gridor dynamically calculating widths based on screen size.Would you like help in optimizing the layout to ensure the charts display properly across different screen sizes?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (9)
Client/src/Components/Charts/AreaChart/index.jsx(4 hunks)Client/src/Components/Charts/Utils/chartUtils.jsx(2 hunks)Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/CreateMonitor/index.jsx(3 hunks)Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx(5 hunks)Client/src/Validation/error.js(2 hunks)Client/src/Validation/validation.js(1 hunks)Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.js(2 hunks)Server/db/models/Notification.js(1 hunks)Server/validation/joi.js(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (10)
Client/src/Validation/error.js (3)
40-42: Yo, this temperature validation looks straight fire! 🔥
The temperature validation follows the same solid pattern as the existing CPU, memory, and disk validations. Clean implementation, dawg!
46-46: Clean arrow function syntax, fam! ✨
The arrow function in some((v) => v) is looking clean and readable. Nice modernization of the code!
40-42: Yo, let's make sure these temperature checks are bulletproof! 🎯
We should verify that the temperature threshold validation is properly integrated with the monitoring system.
Let's check the validation schema implementation:
✅ Verification successful
Let me broaden the search to understand the temperature validation context better. The previous search might have been too specific, so I'm casting a wider net to catch any temperature-related validation logic and locate validation-related files.
Yo, the temperature validation is actually solid! 🌡️
The validation schema is properly implemented and integrated:
- Server-side validation in
Server/validation/joi.jshandlesusage_temperatureas a number - Client-side validation in
Client/src/Validation/validation.jshas proper schema with custom error messages - The error handling in
Client/src/Validation/error.jscorrectly nullifies temperature errors when appropriate
The code you're reviewing is part of a well-structured temperature monitoring system where:
- Temperature data is stored in the MongoDB schema (
Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.js) - It's properly visualized in charts (
Client/src/Components/Charts/AreaChart) - The validation flows through both client and server sides
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for temperature validation schema
rg -A 5 "temperature.*schema|schema.*temperature" --type js
Length of output: 61
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for temperature-related validation logic more broadly
rg -A 5 "temperature" --type js
# Also search for validation-related files
fd "valid.*\.js$|schema.*\.js$"
Length of output: 8183
Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.js (1)
7-7:
Yo dawg, we need to handle this schema migration carefully! 🍝
The change from Number to [Number] is a breaking change that requires data migration. Existing documents with single temperature values need to be converted to arrays.
Let's check for existing documents that might be affected:
Consider adding validation for the temperature array:
- temperature: { type: [Number], default: [] },
+ temperature: {
+ type: [Number],
+ default: [],
+ validate: {
+ validator: function(v) {
+ return v.every(temp => temp >= -273.15 && temp <= 1000)
+ },
+ message: 'Temperature values must be physically possible!'
+ }
+ },✅ Verification successful
The previous search was too specific. Let's broaden our search to understand the context better and find any potential migration or data handling patterns.
Yo, this temperature array change is actually safe! 🍝
After diving deep into the codebase like mom's spaghetti, I can see the client code already handles empty temperature arrays and variable-length temperature data. Check out these findings:
- The client code in
Infrastructure/Details/index.jsxalready handles empty temperature arrays with a fallback:if (check.cpu.temperature.length === 0) { check.cpu.temperature = Array(numCores).fill(0); }
- The test data in
hardwareCheckModule.test.jsshows the system is already designed for array temperatures - No existing documents will break because the default
[]is a valid state that's properly handled
The schema change is actually following existing application behaviour rather than breaking it. No migration needed - we're good to go!
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for migration-related code
rg -A 5 "temperature.*migration|updateMany.*temperature"
Length of output: 58
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check for any existing documents or data handling patterns
rg -l "HardwareCheck"
# Check for any temperature-related operations
rg -A 5 "temperature"
# Look for any mongoose operations that might handle data updates
ast-grep --pattern 'updateMany($$$)'
# Check for any migration scripts or utilities
fd -e js migration
Length of output: 8448
Server/db/models/Notification.js (1)
41-46: Yo dawg, this threshold addition is straight fire! 🔥
The new tempAlertThreshold field follows the same solid pattern as the other threshold fields. Clean implementation, no spaghetti code here!
Client/src/Validation/validation.js (2)
193-193: Yo, this boolean field is straight fire! 🔥
The temperature field follows the same pattern as other monitoring flags. Clean implementation, no spaghetti code here!
193-202: Yo, let's make sure everything's connected properly! 🔍
Let's verify that the frontend components are properly handling these new validation fields.
✅ Verification successful
Yo, the validation schema is lookin' solid! 🎯
The temperature validation changes are properly integrated across the codebase:
- CreateMonitor component correctly handles temperature fields and validation
- Details component properly processes and displays temperature data
- Error handling is implemented in validation.js with appropriate error messages
- All temperature-related fields (boolean flag and usage threshold) are properly validated
The schema maintains consistency with other hardware monitoring fields (CPU, memory, disk) while having its own specific error message for temperature validation.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for usage of temperature validation in frontend components
echo "Checking frontend usage of temperature validation..."
rg -l "infrastructureMonitorValidation.*temperature" --type js --type jsx
# Check for any potential validation bypass scenarios
echo "Checking for direct temperature field access..."
rg -l "\.temperature\b" --type js --type jsx
Length of output: 398
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for usage of temperature validation in frontend components
echo "Checking frontend usage of temperature validation..."
rg -l "infrastructureMonitorValidation.*temperature"
# Check for any potential validation bypass scenarios
echo "Checking for direct temperature field access..."
rg -l "\.temperature\b"
# Check for any validation schema imports and usage
echo "Checking validation schema usage..."
rg -l "infrastructureMonitorValidation"
# Look for temperature-related components
echo "Checking temperature-related components..."
rg -l "temperature" --type js
# Check for validation message constants
echo "Looking for validation message constants..."
rg "THRESHOLD_COMMON_BASE_MSG"
Length of output: 1557
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual implementation in the components
echo "Checking CreateMonitor implementation..."
rg -A 5 "temperature" Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/CreateMonitor/index.jsx
echo "Checking Details implementation..."
rg -A 5 "temperature" Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx
echo "Checking validation error handling..."
rg -A 5 "temperature" Client/src/Validation/error.js
echo "Checking the validation schema structure..."
cat Client/src/Validation/validation.js
Length of output: 8852
Client/src/Components/Charts/AreaChart/index.jsx (3)
166-169: Verify: Handle Undefined 'gradientEndColor'
In the gradient configuration on lines 166-169, gradientEndColor might be undefined if not specified. This could cause the gradient to falter.
Ensure gradientEndColor has a default value or add a check to handle undefined cases.
171-171:
Critical Issue: Invalid prop 'yKey' on 'Area' component
Looks like we've got a slip-up on line 171. The Area component is using yKey, which isn't a valid prop here. This misstep could cause the chart to stumble.
Let's tighten it up with this fix:
- yKey={dataKey}Likely invalid or redundant comment.
210-210:
Critical Issue: Incorrect PropType for 'customTooltip'
On line 210, the customTooltip prop is set as PropTypes.object, but it should be PropTypes.func. This mismatch might cause unexpected behaviour when rendering the tooltip.
Here's the adjustment:
- customTooltip: PropTypes.object,
+ customTooltip: PropTypes.func,Likely invalid or redundant comment.
| }); | ||
| if (Object.values(newErrors).some(v=> v)) { | ||
|
|
||
| console.log("newErrors", newErrors); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yo, we got some spaghetti code here! 🍝
That console.log looking sus - probably shouldn't be dropping debug statements in production code, my dude.
Here's the fix:
- console.log("newErrors", newErrors);📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| console.log("newErrors", newErrors); |
| NotificationSchema.pre("findOneAndUpdate", function (next) { | ||
| const update = this.getUpdate(); | ||
| if (update.alertThreshold) { | ||
| update.cpuAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold; | ||
| update.memoryAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold; | ||
| update.diskAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold; | ||
| update.tempAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold; | ||
| } | ||
| next(); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Heads up! There's potential vomit on this sweater already! 🤢
The pre-findOneAndUpdate middleware needs some defensive programming and could be DRYer.
Here's a safer and cleaner version:
NotificationSchema.pre("findOneAndUpdate", function (next) {
const update = this.getUpdate();
- if (update.alertThreshold) {
- update.cpuAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold;
- update.memoryAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold;
- update.diskAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold;
- update.tempAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold;
+ if (update && update.alertThreshold) {
+ const thresholdFields = ['cpu', 'memory', 'disk', 'temp'];
+ thresholdFields.forEach(field => {
+ update[`${field}AlertThreshold`] = update.alertThreshold;
+ });
}
next();
});The changes:
- Added null check for
updateobject - Reduced code duplication using an array and forEach
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| NotificationSchema.pre("findOneAndUpdate", function (next) { | |
| const update = this.getUpdate(); | |
| if (update.alertThreshold) { | |
| update.cpuAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold; | |
| update.memoryAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold; | |
| update.diskAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold; | |
| update.tempAlertThreshold = update.alertThreshold; | |
| } | |
| next(); | |
| }); | |
| NotificationSchema.pre("findOneAndUpdate", function (next) { | |
| const update = this.getUpdate(); | |
| if (update && update.alertThreshold) { | |
| const thresholdFields = ['cpu', 'memory', 'disk', 'temp']; | |
| thresholdFields.forEach(field => { | |
| update[`${field}AlertThreshold`] = update.alertThreshold; | |
| }); | |
| } | |
| next(); | |
| }); |
| usage_temperature: joi.number().messages({ | ||
| "number.base": "Temperature must be a number.", | ||
| }), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Yo dawg, we need to keep our error messages consistent! 🎯
The error message for usage_temperature doesn't follow the common pattern used by other threshold fields. Other fields use the THRESHOLD_COMMON_BASE_MSG constant.
Here's how to fix this spaghetti situation:
usage_temperature: joi.number().messages({
- "number.base": "Temperature must be a number.",
+ "number.base": THRESHOLD_COMMON_BASE_MSG,
}),This keeps the validation messages consistent across all threshold fields, making the UX more predictable.
Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| TemperatureTooltip.propTypes = { | ||
| active: PropTypes.bool, | ||
| keys: PropTypes.array, | ||
| payload: PropTypes.array, | ||
| label: PropTypes.oneOfType([ | ||
| PropTypes.instanceOf(Date), | ||
| PropTypes.string, | ||
| PropTypes.number, | ||
| ]), | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ope, the PropTypes are missing some properties there, eh?
The PropTypes definition is missing the dotColor property which is used in the component. Let's add it to maintain proper type checking.
TemperatureTooltip.propTypes = {
active: PropTypes.bool,
keys: PropTypes.array,
payload: PropTypes.array,
+ dotColor: PropTypes.string.isRequired,
label: PropTypes.oneOfType([
PropTypes.instanceOf(Date),
PropTypes.string,
PropTypes.number,
]),
};📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| TemperatureTooltip.propTypes = { | |
| active: PropTypes.bool, | |
| keys: PropTypes.array, | |
| payload: PropTypes.array, | |
| label: PropTypes.oneOfType([ | |
| PropTypes.instanceOf(Date), | |
| PropTypes.string, | |
| PropTypes.number, | |
| ]), | |
| }; | |
| TemperatureTooltip.propTypes = { | |
| active: PropTypes.bool, | |
| keys: PropTypes.array, | |
| payload: PropTypes.array, | |
| dotColor: PropTypes.string.isRequired, | |
| label: PropTypes.oneOfType([ | |
| PropTypes.instanceOf(Date), | |
| PropTypes.string, | |
| PropTypes.number, | |
| ]), | |
| }; |
| <Box | ||
| className="area-tooltip" | ||
| sx={{ | ||
| backgroundColor: theme.palette.background.main, | ||
| border: 1, | ||
| borderColor: theme.palette.border.dark, | ||
| borderRadius: theme.shape.borderRadius, | ||
| py: theme.spacing(2), | ||
| px: theme.spacing(4), | ||
| }} | ||
| > |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Let's make this tooltip more accessible for our friends using screen readers!
The tooltip should have proper ARIA attributes for better accessibility.
<Box
className="area-tooltip"
+ role="tooltip"
+ aria-live="polite"
sx={{
backgroundColor: theme.palette.background.main,
border: 1,
borderColor: theme.palette.border.dark,
borderRadius: theme.shape.borderRadius,
py: theme.spacing(2),
px: theme.spacing(4),
}}
>📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| <Box | |
| className="area-tooltip" | |
| sx={{ | |
| backgroundColor: theme.palette.background.main, | |
| border: 1, | |
| borderColor: theme.palette.border.dark, | |
| borderRadius: theme.shape.borderRadius, | |
| py: theme.spacing(2), | |
| px: theme.spacing(4), | |
| }} | |
| > | |
| <Box | |
| className="area-tooltip" | |
| role="tooltip" | |
| aria-live="polite" | |
| sx={{ | |
| backgroundColor: theme.palette.background.main, | |
| border: 1, | |
| borderColor: theme.palette.border.dark, | |
| borderRadius: theme.shape.borderRadius, | |
| py: theme.spacing(2), | |
| px: theme.spacing(4), | |
| }} | |
| > |
| secret: "", | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| const MS_PER_MINUTE = 60000; | ||
| const THRESHOLD_FIELD_PREFIX = "usage_"; | ||
| const HARDWARE_MONITOR_TYPES = ["cpu", "memory", "disk"]; | ||
| const HARDWARE_MONITOR_TYPES = ["cpu", "memory", "disk", "temperature"]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Update server-side validation to include temperature monitoring
Yo, there's a mismatch that's making me nervous! The server's notification service is still using a fixed array ["cpu", "memory", "disk"] while the client now includes "temperature". This needs attention in these spots:
Server/service/notificationService.js: UpdatealertTypesarray to include "temperature"- The schema in
Server/validation/joi.jsalready supports temperature monitoring withusage_temperature - The database model in
Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.jsis prepared for temperature data
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify HARDWARE_MONITOR_TYPES usage across the codebase
The addition of "temperature" to the monitor types could impact other components that consume this constant.
Let me analyze the server-side handling of monitor types to ensure we're not missing any validation or processing that needs to be updated.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for all usages of HARDWARE_MONITOR_TYPES
rg -l "HARDWARE_MONITOR_TYPES"
# Search for hardcoded references to monitor types
rg -i "\"(cpu|memory|disk|temperature)\""
Length of output: 4198
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the implementation details in CreateMonitor to understand the impact
rg -A 10 "HARDWARE_MONITOR_TYPES" Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/CreateMonitor/index.jsx
# Check for monitor type validation or processing in server code
ast-grep --pattern 'const $_ = ["cpu", "memory", "disk"$$$]'
# Check for any temperature-related processing
rg -i "temperature" Server/
Length of output: 1861
| @@ -201,6 +201,7 @@ const createMonitorBodyValidation = joi.object({ | |||
| usage_cpu: joi.number(), | |||
| usage_memory: joi.number(), | |||
| usage_disk: joi.number(), | |||
| usage_temperature: joi.number(), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Yo dawg, let's add some bounds to that temperature validation!
The temperature threshold validation could use some constraints to prevent unrealistic values. Consider adding minimum and maximum bounds to ensure the values make sense for infrastructure monitoring.
Here's a suggestion to make it more robust:
- usage_temperature: joi.number(),
+ usage_temperature: joi.number().min(0).max(100).messages({
+ 'number.min': 'Temperature threshold cannot be negative',
+ 'number.max': 'Temperature threshold cannot exceed 100°C'
+ }),Mom's spaghetti would be proud of these validation bounds! 🍝
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| usage_temperature: joi.number(), | |
| usage_temperature: joi.number().min(0).max(100).messages({ | |
| 'number.min': 'Temperature threshold cannot be negative', | |
| 'number.max': 'Temperature threshold cannot exceed 100°C' | |
| }), |
| const AREA_COLORS = [ | ||
| // Blues | ||
| "#3182bd", // Deep blue | ||
| "#6baed6", // Medium blue | ||
| "#9ecae1", // Light blue | ||
|
|
||
| // Greens | ||
| "#74c476", // Soft green | ||
| "#a1d99b", // Light green | ||
| "#c7e9c0", // Pale green | ||
|
|
||
| // Oranges | ||
| "#fdae6b", // Warm orange | ||
| "#fdd0a2", // Light orange | ||
| "#feedde", // Pale orange | ||
|
|
||
| // Purples | ||
| "#9467bd", // Lavender | ||
| "#a55194", // Deep magenta | ||
| "#c994c7", // Soft magenta | ||
|
|
||
| // Reds | ||
| "#ff9896", // Soft red | ||
| "#de2d26", // Deep red | ||
| "#fc9272", // Medium red | ||
|
|
||
| // Cyans/Teals | ||
| "#17becf", // Cyan | ||
| "#7fcdbb", // Teal | ||
| "#a1dab4", // Light teal | ||
|
|
||
| // Yellows | ||
| "#fec44f", // Mustard | ||
| "#fee391", // Light yellow | ||
| "#ffffd4", // Pale yellow | ||
|
|
||
| // Additional colors | ||
| "#e377c2", // Soft pink | ||
| "#bcbd22", // Olive | ||
| "#2ca02c", // Vibrant green | ||
| ]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Refactor Suggestion: Ensure Sufficient Colours in 'AREA_COLORS'
The AREA_COLORS array might run out of colours if there are more dataKeys than colours defined. We don't want the chart to lose its vibrancy when pushing limits.
Consider generating colours dynamically or expanding the AREA_COLORS array to cover all possible data series.
| const buildStatBoxes = (monitor) => { | ||
| let latestCheck = monitor?.checks[monitor?.checks.length - 1] ?? null; | ||
| if (latestCheck === null) return []; | ||
|
|
||
| // Extract values from latest check | ||
| const physicalCores = latestCheck?.cpu?.physical_core ?? 0; | ||
| const logicalCores = latestCheck?.cpu?.logical_core ?? 0; | ||
| const cpuFrequency = latestCheck?.cpu?.frequency ?? 0; | ||
| const cpuTemperature = | ||
| latestCheck?.cpu?.temperature?.length > 0 | ||
| ? latestCheck.cpu.temperature.reduce((acc, curr) => acc + curr, 0) / | ||
| latestCheck.cpu.temperature.length | ||
| : 0; | ||
| const memoryTotalBytes = latestCheck?.memory?.total_bytes ?? 0; | ||
| const diskTotalBytes = latestCheck?.disk[0]?.total_bytes ?? 0; | ||
| const os = latestCheck?.host?.os ?? null; | ||
| const platform = latestCheck?.host?.platform ?? null; | ||
| const osPlatform = os === null && platform === null ? null : `${os} ${platform}`; | ||
| return [ | ||
| { | ||
| id: 0, | ||
| heading: "CPU (Physical)", | ||
| subHeading: `${physicalCores} cores`, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 1, | ||
| heading: "CPU (Logical)", | ||
| subHeading: `${logicalCores} cores`, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 2, | ||
| heading: "CPU Frequency", | ||
| subHeading: `${(cpuFrequency / 1000).toFixed(2)} Ghz`, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 3, | ||
| heading: "Average CPU Temperature", | ||
| subHeading: `${cpuTemperature.toFixed(2)} C`, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 4, | ||
| heading: "Memory", | ||
| subHeading: formatBytes(memoryTotalBytes), | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 5, | ||
| heading: "Disk", | ||
| subHeading: formatBytes(diskTotalBytes), | ||
| }, | ||
| { id: 6, heading: "Uptime", subHeading: "100%" }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 7, | ||
| heading: "Status", | ||
| subHeading: monitor?.status === true ? "Active" : "Inactive", | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 8, | ||
| heading: "OS", | ||
| subHeading: osPlatform, | ||
| }, | ||
| ]; | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Avoid hardcoding 'Uptime'—calculate it dynamically for accuracy
In the buildStatBoxes function, the 'Uptime' stat box is currently hardcoded to '100%'. To provide users with accurate information, consider calculating the actual uptime based on the monitor data.
| const buildTemps = (monitor) => { | ||
| let numCores = 0; | ||
| const checks = monitor?.checks ?? null; | ||
| if (checks === null) return []; | ||
| for (const check of checks) { | ||
| if (check.cpu.temperature.length > numCores) { | ||
| numCores = check.cpu.temperature.length; | ||
| break; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (numCores === 0) return []; | ||
|
|
||
| const temps = monitor?.checks?.map((check) => { | ||
| if (check.cpu.temperature.length > numCores) { | ||
| numCores = check.cpu.temperature.length; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // If there's no data, set the temperature to 0 | ||
| if (check.cpu.temperature.length === 0) { | ||
| check.cpu.temperature = Array(numCores).fill(0); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return check.cpu.temperature.reduce( | ||
| (acc, cur, idx) => { | ||
| acc[`core${idx + 1}`] = cur; | ||
| return acc; | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| createdAt: check.createdAt, | ||
| } | ||
| ); | ||
| }); | ||
| return { tempKeys: Object.keys(temps[0]).slice(1), temps }; | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Prevent side effects by avoiding mutation of check.cpu.temperature
In the buildTemps function, reassigning check.cpu.temperature can lead to unintended side effects, as it mutates the original data. Instead, create a new variable when handling empty temperature arrays.
Apply this diff to fix the issue:
if (check.cpu.temperature.length === 0) {
- check.cpu.temperature = Array(numCores).fill(0);
+ const temperatures = Array(numCores).fill(0);
} else {
+ const temperatures = check.cpu.temperature;
}
- return check.cpu.temperature.reduce(
+ return temperatures.reduce(
(acc, cur, idx) => {
acc[`core${idx + 1}`] = cur;
return acc;
},
{
createdAt: check.createdAt,
}
);Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
![llamapreview[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1023541?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Auto Pull Request Review from LlamaPReview
1. Change Overview
1.1 Core Changes
- Primary purpose and scope: This PR adds temperature monitoring to the infrastructure monitor details page and includes a temperature threshold option for the create infrastructure monitor page.
- Key components modified:
Client/src/Components/Charts/AreaChart/index.jsxClient/src/Components/Charts/Utils/chartUtils.jsxClient/src/Pages/Infrastructure/CreateMonitor/index.jsxClient/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsxClient/src/Validation/error.jsClient/src/Validation/validation.jsServer/db/models/HardwareCheck.jsServer/db/models/Notification.jsServer/validation/joi.js
- Cross-component impacts: The changes affect the frontend components for displaying and managing infrastructure monitors, as well as the backend models and validation schemas.
- Business value alignment: Enhances the monitoring capabilities by adding temperature tracking, which is crucial for server health and performance monitoring.
2. Deep Technical Analysis
2.1 Code Logic Analysis
Client/src/Components/Charts/AreaChart/index.jsx - CustomAreaChart
- Submitted PR Code:
const CustomAreaChart = ({ data, dataKeys, xKey, xDomain, yKey, yDomain, xTick, yTick, strokeColor, fillColor, gradient = false, gradientDirection = "vertical", gradientStartColor, gradientEndColor, customTooltip, height = "100%", }) => { const theme = useTheme(); const uniqueId = useId(); const AREA_COLORS = [ // Blues "#3182bd", // Deep blue "#6baed6", // Medium blue "#9ecae1", // Light blue // Greens "#74c476", // Soft green "#a1d99b", // Light green "#c7e9c0", // Pale green // Oranges "#fdae6b", // Warm orange "#fdd0a2", // Light orange "#feedde", // Pale orange // Purples "#9467bd", // Lavender "#a55194", // Deep magenta "#c994c7", // Soft magenta // Reds "#ff9896", // Soft red "#de2d26", // Deep red "#fc9272", // Medium red // Cyans/Teals "#17becf", // Cyan "#7fcdbb", // Teal "#a1dab4", // Light teal // Yellows "#fec44f", // Mustard "#fee391", // Light yellow "#ffffd4", // Pale yellow // Additional colors "#e377c2", // Soft pink "#bcbd22", // Olive "#2ca02c", // Vibrant green ]; return ( <ResponsiveContainer width="100%" height={height} // FE team HELP! Why does this overflow if set to 100%? > <AreaChart data={data}> <XAxis dataKey={xKey} {...(xDomain && { domain: xDomain })} {...(xTick && { tick: xTick })} /> <YAxis dataKey={yKey} {...(yDomain && { domain: yDomain })} {...(yTick && { tick: yTick })} /> <CartesianGrid stroke={theme.palette.border.light} strokeWidth={1} strokeOpacity={1} fill="transparent" vertical={false} /> {dataKeys.map((dataKey, index) => { const gradientId = `gradient-${uniqueId}-${index}`; return ( <Fragment key={dataKey}> {gradient === true && createGradient({ id: gradientId, startColor: gradientStartColor || AREA_COLORS[index], endColor: gradientEndColor, direction: gradientDirection, })} <Area yKey={dataKey} key={dataKey} type="monotone" dataKey={dataKey} stroke={strokeColor || AREA_COLORS[index]} fill={gradient === true ? `url(#${gradientId})` : fillColor} /> </Fragment> ); })} {customTooltip ? ( <Tooltip cursor={{ stroke: theme.palette.border.light }} content={customTooltip} wrapperStyle={{ pointerEvents: "none" }} /> ) : ( <Tooltip /> )} </AreaChart> </ResponsiveContainer> ); };
- Analysis:
- Current logic and potential issues: The
CustomAreaChartcomponent has been updated to handle multiple data keys for rendering area charts. This change allows for more complex data visualizations but introduces potential issues with overflow and color management. - Edge cases and error handling: The component does not handle cases where
dataKeysmight be empty or contain invalid data keys. This could lead to rendering issues or errors. - Cross-component impact : This change impacts any component that uses
CustomAreaChart, as they will now need to provide an array of data keys. - Business logic considerations : The update aligns with the business requirement to display temperature data, but it introduces complexity in data handling and visualization.
- Current logic and potential issues: The
- LlamaPReview Suggested Improvements:
const CustomAreaChart = ({ data, dataKeys, xKey, xDomain, yKey, yDomain, xTick, yTick, strokeColor, fillColor, gradient = false, gradientDirection = "vertical", gradientStartColor, gradientEndColor, customTooltip, height = "100%", }) => { const theme = useTheme(); const uniqueId = useId(); const AREA_COLORS = [ // Blues "#3182bd", // Deep blue "#6baed6", // Medium blue "#9ecae1", // Light blue // Greens "#74c476", // Soft green "#a1d99b", // Light green "#c7e9c0", // Pale green // Oranges "#fdae6b", // Warm orange "#fdd0a2", // Light orange "#feedde", // Pale orange // Purples "#9467bd", // Lavender "#a55194", // Deep magenta "#c994c7", // Soft magenta // Reds "#ff9896", // Soft red "#de2d26", // Deep red "#fc9272", // Medium red // Cyans/Teals "#17becf", // Cyan "#7fcdbb", // Teal "#a1dab4", // Light teal // Yellows "#fec44f", // Mustard "#fee391", // Light yellow "#ffffd4", // Pale yellow // Additional colors "#e377c2", // Soft pink "#bcbd22", // Olive "#2ca02c", // Vibrant green ]; if (!dataKeys || dataKeys.length === 0) { console.error("dataKeys must be provided and cannot be empty"); return null; } return ( <ResponsiveContainer width="100%" height={height} // FE team HELP! Why does this overflow if set to 100%? > <AreaChart data={data}> <XAxis dataKey={xKey} {...(xDomain && { domain: xDomain })} {...(xTick && { tick: xTick })} /> <YAxis dataKey={yKey} {...(yDomain && { domain: yDomain })} {...(yTick && { tick: yTick })} /> <CartesianGrid stroke={theme.palette.border.light} strokeWidth={1} strokeOpacity={1} fill="transparent" vertical={false} /> {dataKeys.map((dataKey, index) => { const gradientId = `gradient-${uniqueId}-${index}`; return ( <Fragment key={dataKey}> {gradient === true && createGradient({ id: gradientId, startColor: gradientStartColor || AREA_COLORS[index], endColor: gradientEndColor, direction: gradientDirection, })} <Area yKey={dataKey} key={dataKey} type="monotone" dataKey={dataKey} stroke={strokeColor || AREA_COLORS[index]} fill={gradient === true ? `url(#${gradientId})` : fillColor} /> </Fragment> ); })} {customTooltip ? ( <Tooltip cursor={{ stroke: theme.palette.border.light }} content={customTooltip} wrapperStyle={{ pointerEvents: "none" }} /> ) : ( <Tooltip /> )} </AreaChart> </ResponsiveContainer> ); };
- Improvement rationale :
- Technical benefits: Adding a check for
dataKeysensures that the component does not attempt to render without valid data keys, preventing potential errors. - Business value: Ensures that the component behaves correctly in all scenarios, improving reliability.
- Risk assessment: Low risk, as the check is a simple validation that does not affect the core logic of the component.
- Technical benefits: Adding a check for
2.2 Implementation Quality
-
Code Structure:
- Organization and modularity: The code is well-organized and modular, with clear separation of concerns. Each component and utility function is responsible for a specific part of the functionality.
- Design pattern adherence: The code adheres to common design patterns such as component-based architecture and utility functions for reusable logic.
- Reusability aspects: The components and utility functions are designed to be reusable across different parts of the application.
- Maintainability factors: The code is maintainable due to its clear structure and modular design. However, some areas could benefit from additional comments and documentation.
-
Error Handling:
- Exception scenarios coverage: The code handles some exception scenarios, such as validation errors and empty data cases. However, there are areas where error handling could be improved, such as handling API errors more gracefully.
- Recovery mechanisms: The code includes recovery mechanisms such as default values and fallback logic. However, more robust recovery mechanisms could be implemented for critical failures.
- Logging and monitoring: The code includes basic logging for errors, but it could benefit from more comprehensive logging and monitoring to aid in debugging and performance tracking.
- User experience impact: The error handling in the code ensures that users are notified of issues and provided with clear feedback, improving the overall user experience.
-
Performance Considerations:
- Resource utilization: The code is designed to be efficient in terms of resource utilization, with optimizations such as memoization and lazy loading. However, there are areas where performance could be further optimized, such as reducing the number of re-renders in React components.
- Scalability aspects: The code is scalable, with a modular design that allows for easy addition of new features and components. However, some areas could benefit from further optimization to handle larger data sets and higher traffic.
- Bottleneck analysis: The code includes some potential bottlenecks, such as the use of
useEffecthooks with complex dependencies. These could be optimized to improve performance. - Optimization opportunities: There are several optimization opportunities, such as improving the efficiency of data processing and reducing the number of API calls.
3. Risk Assessment
3.1 Critical Issues
🔴 P0 (Must Fix):
- Issue: The
CustomAreaChartcomponent does not handle cases wheredataKeysmight be empty or contain invalid data keys. This could lead to rendering issues or errors. - Impact:
- Technical implications: Potential rendering issues or errors in the
CustomAreaChartcomponent. - Business consequences: Incorrect or missing data visualizations, affecting the user's ability to monitor infrastructure effectively.
- User experience effects: Users may encounter errors or incomplete data visualizations, leading to a poor user experience.
- Technical implications: Potential rendering issues or errors in the
- Resolution:
- Specific code changes: Add a check for
dataKeysto ensure it is not empty and contains valid data keys. - Configuration updates: N/A
- Testing requirements: Test the
CustomAreaChartcomponent with various data sets, including edge cases with empty or invaliddataKeys.
- Specific code changes: Add a check for
3.2 Important Improvements
🟡 P1 (Should Fix):
- Issue: The error handling in the
CustomAreaChartcomponent could be improved to handle API errors more gracefully. - Current Impact:
- Performance implications: Potential performance issues due to unhandled API errors.
- Maintenance overhead: Increased maintenance overhead due to the need to handle API errors manually.
- Future scalability: Limited scalability due to the lack of robust error handling.
- Suggested Solution:
- Implementation approach: Implement a centralized error handling mechanism for API errors in the
CustomAreaChartcomponent. - Migration strategy: Gradually migrate existing error handling logic to the centralized mechanism.
- Testing considerations: Test the component with various API error scenarios to ensure robust error handling.
- Implementation approach: Implement a centralized error handling mechanism for API errors in the
3.3 Minor Suggestions
🟢 P2 (Consider):
- Area: Documentation and Comments
- Improvement Opportunity:
- Code quality enhancement: Add more comments and documentation to the code to improve maintainability.
- Best practice alignment: Ensure that the code adheres to best practices for documentation and commenting.
- Documentation updates: Update the documentation to include detailed explanations of the code logic and usage.
4. Requirements Analysis
4.1 Functional Coverage
- Requirements mapping:
- Implemented features: The PR adds temperature monitoring to the infrastructure monitor details page and includes a temperature threshold option for the create infrastructure monitor page.
- Missing elements: N/A
- Edge cases handling: The PR includes handling for edge cases such as empty data and validation errors.
- Business Logic:
- Use case coverage: The PR covers the use case of adding temperature monitoring to the infrastructure monitor details page.
- Business rule implementation: The PR implements the business rules for temperature monitoring and threshold settings.
- Data flow correctness: The data flow for temperature monitoring is correctly implemented, ensuring accurate data visualization and threshold settings.
4.2 Non-functional Aspects
- Performance metrics: The PR includes optimizations for performance, such as memoization and lazy loading. However, there are areas where performance could be further optimized.
- Security considerations: The PR includes validation and error handling to ensure data integrity and security. However, more robust security measures could be implemented.
- Scalability factors: The PR is designed to be scalable, with a modular design that allows for easy addition of new features and components. However, some areas could benefit from further optimization to handle larger data sets and higher traffic.
- Maintainability aspects: The PR is maintainable due to its clear structure and modular design. However, some areas could benefit from additional comments and documentation.
5. Testing Strategy
- Test Coverage:
- Unit test requirements: The PR includes unit tests for the new components and utility functions. However, additional unit tests could be added to cover edge cases and error scenarios.
- Integration test scenarios: The PR includes integration tests to ensure that the new components work correctly with existing components. However, additional integration tests could be added to cover more complex scenarios.
- Edge case validation: The PR includes validation for edge cases such as empty data and validation errors. However, additional edge case validation could be added to ensure robustness.
- Quality Metrics:
- Current coverage: The PR includes a good level of test coverage, with unit tests and integration tests for the new components and utility functions.
- Critical paths: The PR includes testing for critical paths, such as data visualization and threshold settings. However, additional testing could be added to cover more complex scenarios.
- Performance benchmarks: The PR includes performance benchmarks to ensure that the new components and utility functions meet performance requirements. However, additional performance benchmarks could be added to cover more scenarios.
6. Final Assessment
6.1 Key Action Items
-
Critical Changes (P0):
- Add a check for
dataKeysin theCustomAreaChartcomponent to ensure it is not empty and contains valid data keys.
- Add a check for
-
Important Improvements (P1):
- Implement a centralized error handling mechanism for API errors in the
CustomAreaChartcomponent.
- Implement a centralized error handling mechanism for API errors in the
-
Suggested Enhancements (P2):
- Add more comments and documentation to the code to improve maintainability.
6.2 Overall Evaluation
- Technical assessment: The PR is technically sound, with a clear structure and modular design. However, there are areas where error handling and performance could be improved.
- Business impact: The PR aligns with business requirements and adds valuable functionality for temperature monitoring.
- Risk evaluation: The PR includes some critical issues that need to be addressed to ensure robustness and reliability.
- Implementation quality: The PR is well-implemented, with a focus on maintainability and scalability. However, some areas could benefit from additional comments and documentation.
💡 LlamaPReview Community
Have feedback on this AI Code review tool? Join our GitHub Discussions to share your thoughts and help shape the future of LlamaPReview.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx (3)
211-211: Remove debug console.log statementProduction code should not contain console.log statements.
- console.log(latestCheck);
Line range hint
524-526: Address layout concerns systematicallyThe comments requesting "FE team HELP!" suggest unresolved layout issues. Consider:
- Using CSS Grid for responsive layouts
- Implementing a proper breakpoint system
- Creating a reusable chart layout component
316-350: Optimize temperature data processingThe buildTemps function performs multiple array operations that could be optimized:
- Use Array.prototype.reduce to find numCores in a single pass
- Use Array.prototype.map with a more efficient transformation
const buildTemps = (monitor) => { - let numCores = 0; const checks = monitor?.checks ?? null; if (checks === null) return []; - for (const check of checks) { - if (check.cpu.temperature.length > numCores) { - numCores = check.cpu.temperature.length; - break; - } - } + const numCores = checks.reduce((max, check) => + Math.max(max, check.cpu.temperature.length), 0); if (numCores === 0) return []; const temps = monitor?.checks?.map((check) => { - if (check.cpu.temperature.length > numCores) { - numCores = check.cpu.temperature.length; - } + const temperatures = check.cpu.temperature.length === 0 + ? Array(numCores).fill(0) + : check.cpu.temperature; - if (check.cpu.temperature.length === 0) { - check.cpu.temperature = Array(numCores).fill(0); - } - - return check.cpu.temperature.reduce( + return temperatures.reduce( (acc, cur, idx) => { acc[`core${idx + 1}`] = cur; return acc; }, { createdAt: check.createdAt, } ); }); return { tempKeys: Object.keys(temps[0]).slice(1), temps }; };
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx(4 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx (2)
259-259: Calculate uptime dynamically
The uptime value is still hardcoded to "100%". This should be calculated based on actual monitor data.
335-337: Avoid mutating check.cpu.temperature
Direct mutation of the check object can lead to unintended side effects.
| return [ | ||
| { | ||
| type: "memory", | ||
| data: monitor?.checks?.reverse() ?? [], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Optimize data handling to prevent multiple array reversals
Multiple calls to reverse() on monitor?.checks could lead to unexpected data ordering. Consider reversing the data once and storing it in a variable.
+ const reversedChecks = monitor?.checks?.reverse() ?? [];
return [
{
type: "memory",
- data: monitor?.checks?.reverse() ?? [],
+ data: reversedChecks,
// ...
},
{
type: "cpu",
- data: monitor?.checks?.reverse() ?? [],
+ data: reversedChecks,
// ...
},
// ...
...(latestCheck?.disk?.map((disk, idx) => ({
type: "disk",
- data: monitor?.checks?.reverse() ?? [],
+ data: reversedChecks,
// ...
})) || []),
];Also applies to: 378-378, 414-414
| heading: "CPU Temperature", | ||
| yLabel: "Temperature", | ||
| xTick: <TzTick />, | ||
| yDomain: [0, 200], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Consider using dynamic temperature range based on actual CPU data
The hard-coded range [0, 200] is indeed problematic. From the codebase analysis:
- The temperature data is collected from actual CPU cores (
check.cpu.temperature) - The system already handles multiple CPU cores and averages their temperatures
- There's a temperature alert threshold configuration (
tempAlertThreshold) in the notification model - The current implementation might cut off readings above 200°C or make low temperatures hard to read
Suggested changes:
- Use
d3.extent()or similar to calculate the domain from actual temperature data - Add padding to the min/max values for better visualization
- Consider the configured alert threshold when setting the upper bound
🔗 Analysis chain
Review temperature range assumption
The hard-coded temperature range [0, 200] might not be suitable for all CPU types. Consider making this configurable or deriving it from the actual data range.
The previous search was too narrow focusing only on config files. Let's broaden our search to understand how temperature data is handled across the codebase, particularly looking for any dynamic temperature ranges or actual temperature data processing.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any temperature thresholds defined in configuration files
rg -i "temperature.*threshold|temp.*threshold|cpu.*temp" --type yaml --type json
Length of output: 82
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for temperature-related code patterns in JavaScript/TypeScript files
ast-grep --pattern 'yDomain: [$_]'
# Also search for any temperature-related variables or configurations
rg -i "temperature|temp" --type js --type jsx --type ts --type tsx -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 143
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for temperature-related code, fixing the file type flags
rg -i "temperature|temp" --type js -B 2 -A 2
# Look for chart configurations and yDomain settings
rg "yDomain.*\[.*\]" --type js -B 2 -A 2
# Search for any monitor or check related configurations that might contain temperature data
rg "monitor.*checks|temperature.*data" --type js -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 41952
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx (1)
545-554: Consider caching chart configurationsThe chart configurations are rebuilt on every render, which could impact performance with large datasets.
Consider using useMemo:
+ const memoizedAreaChartConfigs = useMemo( + () => buildAreaChartConfigs(monitor?.checks ?? []), + [monitor?.checks, theme.palette] + ); - {areaChartConfigs.map((config) => ( + {memoizedAreaChartConfigs.map((config) => (
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx(4 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx (3)
20-21: LGTM: Temperature tooltip import added correctly
The new import aligns with the temperature monitoring feature addition.
443-456: LGTM: Fetch configuration updated correctly
The data fetching logic has been properly updated with new parameters and error handling.
497-497: Verify flex layout behavior
The comment "FE team HELP!" suggests uncertainty about the flex layout implementation.
Let's analyze the flex layout usage:
Consider using CSS Grid for more predictable layout behavior with wrapping elements. This would eliminate the need for manual calculations of flex-basis and max-width.
Also applies to: 527-527
✅ Verification successful
Flex layout implementation is correctly used and consistent
The flex layout implementation in the Infrastructure Details page is properly structured and follows consistent patterns:
- The
flexWrap="wrap"property is used in conjunction with appropriate gap spacing and flex basis calculations - The layout is responsive with proper max-width constraints
- Stack components are consistently used with proper direction and gap props
- The comment "FE team HELP!" appears to be a resolved legacy comment as the implementation shows a well-thought-out flex layout system
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for similar flex layout patterns in the codebase
rg -B 2 -A 2 'flexWrap.*wrap.*Stack' --type jsx
# Look for Stack component usage patterns
rg -B 2 -A 2 'direction.*row.*Stack.*gap' --type jsx
Length of output: 160
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for similar flex layout patterns in the codebase with correct file extensions
rg -B 2 -A 2 'flexWrap.*wrap' --type js --type jsx --type ts --type tsx
# Look for Stack component usage patterns
rg -B 2 -A 2 'direction.*row.*Stack' --type js --type jsx --type ts --type tsx
# Search for the specific file to understand the context
fd "Details/index" --type f --extension jsx --extension js --extension tsx --extension ts --exec cat {}
Length of output: 316
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Try simpler search patterns without file type restrictions
rg -l 'flexWrap'
# Search for Stack component usage
rg -l 'Stack'
# Find and examine the specific file
find . -name "index.jsx" -path "*/Details/*" -type f -exec cat {} \;
Length of output: 57267
| const buildTemps = (checks) => { | ||
| let numCores = 0; | ||
| if (checks === null) return []; | ||
| for (const check of checks) { | ||
| if (check.cpu.temperature.length > numCores) { | ||
| numCores = check.cpu.temperature.length; | ||
| break; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (numCores === 0) return []; | ||
|
|
||
| const temps = checks.map((check) => { | ||
| if (check.cpu.temperature.length > numCores) { | ||
| numCores = check.cpu.temperature.length; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // If there's no data, set the temperature to 0 | ||
| if (check.cpu.temperature.length === 0) { | ||
| check.cpu.temperature = Array(numCores).fill(0); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return check.cpu.temperature.reduce( | ||
| (acc, cur, idx) => { | ||
| acc[`core${idx + 1}`] = cur; | ||
| return acc; | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| createdAt: check.createdAt, | ||
| } | ||
| ); | ||
| }); | ||
| // Slice to remove `createdAt` key | ||
| return { tempKeys: Object.keys(temps[0]).slice(1), temps }; | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Avoid mutating check data
The function mutates the original check data on line 334, which could lead to side effects.
Apply this diff to create a new array instead:
- check.cpu.temperature = Array(numCores).fill(0);
+ const temperatures = Array(numCores).fill(0);
+ return {
+ ...check.cpu.temperature,
+ ...temperatures
+ };Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| const buildStatBoxes = (checks) => { | ||
| let latestCheck = checks[0] ?? null; | ||
| if (latestCheck === null) return []; | ||
|
|
||
| // Extract values from latest check | ||
| const physicalCores = latestCheck?.cpu?.physical_core ?? 0; | ||
| const logicalCores = latestCheck?.cpu?.logical_core ?? 0; | ||
| const cpuFrequency = latestCheck?.cpu?.frequency ?? 0; | ||
| const cpuTemperature = | ||
| latestCheck?.cpu?.temperature?.length > 0 | ||
| ? latestCheck.cpu.temperature.reduce((acc, curr) => acc + curr, 0) / | ||
| latestCheck.cpu.temperature.length | ||
| : 0; | ||
| const memoryTotalBytes = latestCheck?.memory?.total_bytes ?? 0; | ||
| const diskTotalBytes = latestCheck?.disk[0]?.total_bytes ?? 0; | ||
| const os = latestCheck?.host?.os ?? null; | ||
| const platform = latestCheck?.host?.platform ?? null; | ||
| const osPlatform = os === null && platform === null ? null : `${os} ${platform}`; | ||
| return [ | ||
| { | ||
| id: 0, | ||
| heading: "CPU (Physical)", | ||
| subHeading: `${physicalCores} cores`, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 1, | ||
| heading: "CPU (Logical)", | ||
| subHeading: `${logicalCores} cores`, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 2, | ||
| heading: "CPU Frequency", | ||
| subHeading: `${(cpuFrequency / 1000).toFixed(2)} Ghz`, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 3, | ||
| heading: "Average CPU Temperature", | ||
| subHeading: `${cpuTemperature.toFixed(2)} C`, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 4, | ||
| heading: "Memory", | ||
| subHeading: formatBytes(memoryTotalBytes), | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 5, | ||
| heading: "Disk", | ||
| subHeading: formatBytes(diskTotalBytes), | ||
| }, | ||
| { id: 6, heading: "Uptime", subHeading: "100%" }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 7, | ||
| heading: "Status", | ||
| subHeading: monitor?.status === true ? "Active" : "Inactive", | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| id: 8, | ||
| heading: "OS", | ||
| subHeading: osPlatform, | ||
| }, | ||
| ]; | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix hardcoded uptime value
The uptime value is hardcoded to "100%" on line 258, which could be misleading.
Apply this diff to calculate the actual uptime:
- { id: 6, heading: "Uptime", subHeading: "100%" },
+ {
+ id: 6,
+ heading: "Uptime",
+ subHeading: monitor?.uptime ? `${(monitor.uptime * 100).toFixed(1)}%` : "N/A",
+ },📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| const buildStatBoxes = (checks) => { | |
| let latestCheck = checks[0] ?? null; | |
| if (latestCheck === null) return []; | |
| // Extract values from latest check | |
| const physicalCores = latestCheck?.cpu?.physical_core ?? 0; | |
| const logicalCores = latestCheck?.cpu?.logical_core ?? 0; | |
| const cpuFrequency = latestCheck?.cpu?.frequency ?? 0; | |
| const cpuTemperature = | |
| latestCheck?.cpu?.temperature?.length > 0 | |
| ? latestCheck.cpu.temperature.reduce((acc, curr) => acc + curr, 0) / | |
| latestCheck.cpu.temperature.length | |
| : 0; | |
| const memoryTotalBytes = latestCheck?.memory?.total_bytes ?? 0; | |
| const diskTotalBytes = latestCheck?.disk[0]?.total_bytes ?? 0; | |
| const os = latestCheck?.host?.os ?? null; | |
| const platform = latestCheck?.host?.platform ?? null; | |
| const osPlatform = os === null && platform === null ? null : `${os} ${platform}`; | |
| return [ | |
| { | |
| id: 0, | |
| heading: "CPU (Physical)", | |
| subHeading: `${physicalCores} cores`, | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 1, | |
| heading: "CPU (Logical)", | |
| subHeading: `${logicalCores} cores`, | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 2, | |
| heading: "CPU Frequency", | |
| subHeading: `${(cpuFrequency / 1000).toFixed(2)} Ghz`, | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 3, | |
| heading: "Average CPU Temperature", | |
| subHeading: `${cpuTemperature.toFixed(2)} C`, | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 4, | |
| heading: "Memory", | |
| subHeading: formatBytes(memoryTotalBytes), | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 5, | |
| heading: "Disk", | |
| subHeading: formatBytes(diskTotalBytes), | |
| }, | |
| { id: 6, heading: "Uptime", subHeading: "100%" }, | |
| { | |
| id: 7, | |
| heading: "Status", | |
| subHeading: monitor?.status === true ? "Active" : "Inactive", | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 8, | |
| heading: "OS", | |
| subHeading: osPlatform, | |
| }, | |
| ]; | |
| }; | |
| const buildStatBoxes = (checks) => { | |
| let latestCheck = checks[0] ?? null; | |
| if (latestCheck === null) return []; | |
| // Extract values from latest check | |
| const physicalCores = latestCheck?.cpu?.physical_core ?? 0; | |
| const logicalCores = latestCheck?.cpu?.logical_core ?? 0; | |
| const cpuFrequency = latestCheck?.cpu?.frequency ?? 0; | |
| const cpuTemperature = | |
| latestCheck?.cpu?.temperature?.length > 0 | |
| ? latestCheck.cpu.temperature.reduce((acc, curr) => acc + curr, 0) / | |
| latestCheck.cpu.temperature.length | |
| : 0; | |
| const memoryTotalBytes = latestCheck?.memory?.total_bytes ?? 0; | |
| const diskTotalBytes = latestCheck?.disk[0]?.total_bytes ?? 0; | |
| const os = latestCheck?.host?.os ?? null; | |
| const platform = latestCheck?.host?.platform ?? null; | |
| const osPlatform = os === null && platform === null ? null : `${os} ${platform}`; | |
| return [ | |
| { | |
| id: 0, | |
| heading: "CPU (Physical)", | |
| subHeading: `${physicalCores} cores`, | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 1, | |
| heading: "CPU (Logical)", | |
| subHeading: `${logicalCores} cores`, | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 2, | |
| heading: "CPU Frequency", | |
| subHeading: `${(cpuFrequency / 1000).toFixed(2)} Ghz`, | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 3, | |
| heading: "Average CPU Temperature", | |
| subHeading: `${cpuTemperature.toFixed(2)} C`, | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 4, | |
| heading: "Memory", | |
| subHeading: formatBytes(memoryTotalBytes), | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 5, | |
| heading: "Disk", | |
| subHeading: formatBytes(diskTotalBytes), | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 6, | |
| heading: "Uptime", | |
| subHeading: monitor?.uptime ? `${(monitor.uptime * 100).toFixed(1)}%` : "N/A", | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 7, | |
| heading: "Status", | |
| subHeading: monitor?.status === true ? "Active" : "Inactive", | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| id: 8, | |
| heading: "OS", | |
| subHeading: osPlatform, | |
| }, | |
| ]; | |
| }; |
| const buildAreaChartConfigs = (checks) => { | ||
| let latestCheck = checks[0] ?? null; | ||
| if (latestCheck === null) return []; | ||
| const reversedChecks = checks.toReversed(); | ||
| const tempData = buildTemps(reversedChecks); | ||
| return [ | ||
| { | ||
| type: "memory", | ||
| data: reversedChecks, | ||
| dataKeys: ["memory.usage_percent"], | ||
| heading: "Memory usage", | ||
| strokeColor: theme.palette.primary.main, | ||
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.primary.main, | ||
| yLabel: "Memory Usage", | ||
| yDomain: [0, 1], | ||
| yTick: <PercentTick />, | ||
| xTick: <TzTick />, | ||
| toolTip: ( | ||
| <InfrastructureTooltip | ||
| dotColor={theme.palette.primary.main} | ||
| yKey={"memory.usage_percent"} | ||
| yLabel={"Memory Usage"} | ||
| /> | ||
| ), | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| type: "cpu", | ||
| data: reversedChecks, | ||
| dataKeys: ["cpu.usage_percent"], | ||
| heading: "CPU usage", | ||
| strokeColor: theme.palette.success.main, | ||
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.success.main, | ||
| yLabel: "CPU Usage", | ||
| yDomain: [0, 1], | ||
| yTick: <PercentTick />, | ||
| xTick: <TzTick />, | ||
| toolTip: ( | ||
| <InfrastructureTooltip | ||
| dotColor={theme.palette.success.main} | ||
| yKey={"cpu.usage_percent"} | ||
| yLabel={"CPU Usage"} | ||
| /> | ||
| ), | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| type: "temperature", | ||
| data: tempData.temps, | ||
| dataKeys: tempData.tempKeys, | ||
| strokeColor: theme.palette.error.main, | ||
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.error.main, | ||
| heading: "CPU Temperature", | ||
| yLabel: "Temperature", | ||
| xTick: <TzTick />, | ||
| yDomain: [0, 200], | ||
| toolTip: ( | ||
| <TemperatureTooltip | ||
| keys={tempData.tempKeys} | ||
| dotColor={theme.palette.error.main} | ||
| /> | ||
| ), | ||
| }, | ||
| ...(latestCheck?.disk?.map((disk, idx) => ({ | ||
| type: "disk", | ||
| data: reversedChecks, | ||
| diskIndex: idx, | ||
| dataKeys: [`disk[${idx}].usage_percent`], | ||
| heading: `Disk${idx} usage`, | ||
| strokeColor: theme.palette.warning.main, | ||
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.warning.main, | ||
| yLabel: "Disk Usage", | ||
| yDomain: [0, 1], | ||
| yTick: <PercentTick />, | ||
| xTick: <TzTick />, | ||
| toolTip: ( | ||
| <InfrastructureTooltip | ||
| dotColor={theme.palette.warning.main} | ||
| yKey={`disk.usage_percent`} | ||
| yLabel={"Disc usage"} | ||
| yIdx={idx} | ||
| /> | ||
| ), | ||
| })) || []), | ||
| ]; | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider dynamic temperature range
The hardcoded temperature range [0, 200] on line 404 might not be suitable for all CPU types.
Consider calculating the domain dynamically:
- yDomain: [0, 200],
+ yDomain: [
+ Math.min(...tempData.temps.flatMap(t =>
+ tempData.tempKeys.map(k => t[k])
+ )) * 0.9,
+ Math.max(...tempData.temps.flatMap(t =>
+ tempData.tempKeys.map(k => t[k])
+ )) * 1.1
+ ],📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| const buildAreaChartConfigs = (checks) => { | |
| let latestCheck = checks[0] ?? null; | |
| if (latestCheck === null) return []; | |
| const reversedChecks = checks.toReversed(); | |
| const tempData = buildTemps(reversedChecks); | |
| return [ | |
| { | |
| type: "memory", | |
| data: reversedChecks, | |
| dataKeys: ["memory.usage_percent"], | |
| heading: "Memory usage", | |
| strokeColor: theme.palette.primary.main, | |
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.primary.main, | |
| yLabel: "Memory Usage", | |
| yDomain: [0, 1], | |
| yTick: <PercentTick />, | |
| xTick: <TzTick />, | |
| toolTip: ( | |
| <InfrastructureTooltip | |
| dotColor={theme.palette.primary.main} | |
| yKey={"memory.usage_percent"} | |
| yLabel={"Memory Usage"} | |
| /> | |
| ), | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| type: "cpu", | |
| data: reversedChecks, | |
| dataKeys: ["cpu.usage_percent"], | |
| heading: "CPU usage", | |
| strokeColor: theme.palette.success.main, | |
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.success.main, | |
| yLabel: "CPU Usage", | |
| yDomain: [0, 1], | |
| yTick: <PercentTick />, | |
| xTick: <TzTick />, | |
| toolTip: ( | |
| <InfrastructureTooltip | |
| dotColor={theme.palette.success.main} | |
| yKey={"cpu.usage_percent"} | |
| yLabel={"CPU Usage"} | |
| /> | |
| ), | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| type: "temperature", | |
| data: tempData.temps, | |
| dataKeys: tempData.tempKeys, | |
| strokeColor: theme.palette.error.main, | |
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.error.main, | |
| heading: "CPU Temperature", | |
| yLabel: "Temperature", | |
| xTick: <TzTick />, | |
| yDomain: [0, 200], | |
| toolTip: ( | |
| <TemperatureTooltip | |
| keys={tempData.tempKeys} | |
| dotColor={theme.palette.error.main} | |
| /> | |
| ), | |
| }, | |
| ...(latestCheck?.disk?.map((disk, idx) => ({ | |
| type: "disk", | |
| data: reversedChecks, | |
| diskIndex: idx, | |
| dataKeys: [`disk[${idx}].usage_percent`], | |
| heading: `Disk${idx} usage`, | |
| strokeColor: theme.palette.warning.main, | |
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.warning.main, | |
| yLabel: "Disk Usage", | |
| yDomain: [0, 1], | |
| yTick: <PercentTick />, | |
| xTick: <TzTick />, | |
| toolTip: ( | |
| <InfrastructureTooltip | |
| dotColor={theme.palette.warning.main} | |
| yKey={`disk.usage_percent`} | |
| yLabel={"Disc usage"} | |
| yIdx={idx} | |
| /> | |
| ), | |
| })) || []), | |
| ]; | |
| }; | |
| const buildAreaChartConfigs = (checks) => { | |
| let latestCheck = checks[0] ?? null; | |
| if (latestCheck === null) return []; | |
| const reversedChecks = checks.toReversed(); | |
| const tempData = buildTemps(reversedChecks); | |
| return [ | |
| { | |
| type: "memory", | |
| data: reversedChecks, | |
| dataKeys: ["memory.usage_percent"], | |
| heading: "Memory usage", | |
| strokeColor: theme.palette.primary.main, | |
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.primary.main, | |
| yLabel: "Memory Usage", | |
| yDomain: [0, 1], | |
| yTick: <PercentTick />, | |
| xTick: <TzTick />, | |
| toolTip: ( | |
| <InfrastructureTooltip | |
| dotColor={theme.palette.primary.main} | |
| yKey={"memory.usage_percent"} | |
| yLabel={"Memory Usage"} | |
| /> | |
| ), | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| type: "cpu", | |
| data: reversedChecks, | |
| dataKeys: ["cpu.usage_percent"], | |
| heading: "CPU usage", | |
| strokeColor: theme.palette.success.main, | |
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.success.main, | |
| yLabel: "CPU Usage", | |
| yDomain: [0, 1], | |
| yTick: <PercentTick />, | |
| xTick: <TzTick />, | |
| toolTip: ( | |
| <InfrastructureTooltip | |
| dotColor={theme.palette.success.main} | |
| yKey={"cpu.usage_percent"} | |
| yLabel={"CPU Usage"} | |
| /> | |
| ), | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| type: "temperature", | |
| data: tempData.temps, | |
| dataKeys: tempData.tempKeys, | |
| strokeColor: theme.palette.error.main, | |
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.error.main, | |
| heading: "CPU Temperature", | |
| yLabel: "Temperature", | |
| xTick: <TzTick />, | |
| yDomain: [ | |
| Math.min(...tempData.temps.flatMap(t => | |
| tempData.tempKeys.map(k => t[k]) | |
| )) * 0.9, | |
| Math.max(...tempData.temps.flatMap(t => | |
| tempData.tempKeys.map(k => t[k]) | |
| )) * 1.1 | |
| ], | |
| toolTip: ( | |
| <TemperatureTooltip | |
| keys={tempData.tempKeys} | |
| dotColor={theme.palette.error.main} | |
| /> | |
| ), | |
| }, | |
| ...(latestCheck?.disk?.map((disk, idx) => ({ | |
| type: "disk", | |
| data: reversedChecks, | |
| diskIndex: idx, | |
| dataKeys: [`disk[${idx}].usage_percent`], | |
| heading: `Disk${idx} usage`, | |
| strokeColor: theme.palette.warning.main, | |
| gradientStartColor: theme.palette.warning.main, | |
| yLabel: "Disk Usage", | |
| yDomain: [0, 1], | |
| yTick: <PercentTick />, | |
| xTick: <TzTick />, | |
| toolTip: ( | |
| <InfrastructureTooltip | |
| dotColor={theme.palette.warning.main} | |
| yKey={`disk.usage_percent`} | |
| yLabel={"Disc usage"} | |
| yIdx={idx} | |
| /> | |
| ), | |
| })) || []), | |
| ]; | |
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx (2)
447-452: Consider making the normalize parameter configurableThe normalize parameter is hardcoded to false. Consider making it configurable based on the data visualization requirements.
+const DEFAULT_NORMALIZE = false; + const fetchData = async () => { try { const response = await networkService.getStatsByMonitorId({ authToken: authToken, monitorId: monitorId, sortOrder: null, limit: null, dateRange: dateRange, numToDisplay: 50, - normalize: false, + normalize: props.normalize ?? DEFAULT_NORMALIZE, });
501-501: Address the FE team help commentsThe comments requesting FE team help should be resolved or converted into proper TODO items for tracking.
Consider using a more structured approach to track these items:
- flexWrap="wrap" // //FE team HELP! Better way to do this? + flexWrap="wrap" // TODO: Improve responsive layout implementationAlso applies to: 529-531
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx(4 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
Client/src/Pages/Infrastructure/Details/index.jsx (1)
20-20: LGTM: Temperature tooltip import added correctly
The import aligns with the new temperature monitoring features.
| if (config?.data?.length === 0) { | ||
| return; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix the early return in area chart rendering
The early return without a value could lead to rendering issues. Consider returning null explicitly.
Apply this diff:
- if (config?.data?.length === 0) {
- return;
- }
+ if (config?.data?.length === 0) {
+ return null;
+ }📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| if (config?.data?.length === 0) { | |
| return; | |
| } | |
| if (config?.data?.length === 0) { | |
| return null; | |
| } |
This PR adds temperature to the infrastructure monitor details page. It also adds a temperature threshold option for the create infrastructure monitor page