Skip to content
New issue

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

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

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fixes #24570 - dynamicailly import password strength component #6719

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

ohadlevy
Copy link
Member

this reduced the vendor file by about 800kb and reduce
every full page reload by about 100ms on my machine

@theforeman-bot
Copy link
Member

Issues: #24570

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

webpack analyze before
image
webpack analyze after
image

vendor file size decreased by about 800K
(not to mention that it should not be exposed to plugins to begin with imho)

and my chrome loading statistics shows a decrease in script evaluation for about 85ms +-

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

this of course based on @amirfefer work in #5934

@ares
Copy link
Member

ares commented Apr 30, 2019

Could you please help me understand how the loading changed? Is this loading the component somehow via async request only when needed?

Edit: also was the original concern from @tbrisker from the original PR addressed? I may have missed some discourse discussion.

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

Could you please help me understand how the loading changed? Is this loading the component somehow via async request only when needed?

yes, this loads the the component async on demand, e.g. only when the react component is mounted, it would make an additional script call to fetch the code itself, this imho reduce the time the browser needs to parse the content (in this case about 800kb of common password strings) and delay any page load because of it, it is very similar to adding an additional JavaScript tag in a view but without the penalty of turoblink full page reloads.

if this approach is supported, I plan to continue and move other non common code paths (such as novnc, spice, ace editor etc) to separate bundles to continuously improve initial / full page (re)loads.

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

I forgot to mention this also uses the patternfly loaderState component, that only shows a spinner if its loading over 250ms (or something like that),

@theforeman-bot
Copy link
Member

There were the following issues with the commit message:

  • 50bdc2f must be in the format fixes #redmine_number - brief description

If you don't have a ticket number, please create an issue in Redmine.

More guidelines are available in Coding Standards or on the Foreman wiki.


This message was auto-generated by Foreman's prprocessor

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

as an example, I've moved novnc to its own bundle as well, I'm not fixing the current test failures as I would like to get an overall ack/nack on the path.

Copy link
Member

@amirfefer amirfefer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

every full page reload by about 100ms on my machine

verified, ~100ms doesn't sound much, but if we will choose this approach, over time the differences would be more significant.

@ekohl
Copy link
Member

ekohl commented Apr 30, 2019

Not going to comment on the implementation, but the general direction sounds correct to me. Will this be an issue for plugins or is it fully transparent for them?

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

Not going to comment on the implementation, but the general direction sounds correct to me.

I'm looking for input from @sharvit and @amirfefer etc...

Will this be an issue for plugins or is it fully transparent for them?

I don't expect any issues.

Copy link
Contributor

@sharvit sharvit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for bringing it up @ohadlevy, removing the password-strength and moving it into a separate bundle that loads on demand makes sense to me and I believe it's a good direction.

Hasn't tested it yet but the implementation using react-loadable with patternfly-react LoadingState looks good and simple for me 👍

@@ -68,5 +67,5 @@ module.exports = [
'jstz',
'urijs',
'uuid',
'@novnc/novnc/core/rfb.js',
// '@novnc/novnc/core/rfb.js',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does it relate to the PR scope?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it should be removed.... @sharvit can you answer the following:

  1. where should i put the loading section? I put it in index next to connect, not sure if we should split the two?
  2. how do you suggest to do testings? have a look at the current failure (which I think might impact your answer on the first question)

thanks!

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Before you go ahead too far, I'd like to hear from @tbrisker too. I've seen clear -1 from him previously. Chances are that concerns were addressed or no longer apply.

@amirfefer, was the 100ms boost in dev or production environment? If in dev, can you also check impact on production?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • where should i put the loading section? I put it in index next to connect, not sure if we should split the two?
  • how do you suggest to do testings? have a look at the current failure (which I think might impact your answer on the first question)

I believe it belongs to the index.js while the integration.test.js should test the different loading states (pending, error, success).
Does the error appear because the integration.test.js doesn't wait for the loading?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Another direction can be to wrap the react-password-strength lib with Loadable

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@sharvit I did try both (in index and to wrap the npm package itself) in both cases the PasswordStrength/tests/integration.test.js should flow test failed

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I didn't get a chance to look into this PR too much, but IIRC my main concern in the past was around the change being focused on reducing download size, which is a one-time cost on production environments as all the assets should be cached and networks tend to be fast.
If this leads to a measurable improvement in page rendering speed in production than i don't have objections - as long as we have some benchmark results showing the improvement to be significant enough to be worth the extra effort and complexity.
We should benchmark the difference both on pages that require the dynamically imported components and those that don't - I'd expect faster loads on pages that don't and slower results on pages that do (since they would need to wait for the extra file to be loaded and rendered before completing their own render), at which point we can say "we would rather wait 200ms more on pages X to make pages !X faster by 100ms"

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@sharvit I did try both (in index and to wrap the npm package itself) in both cases the PasswordStrength/tests/integration.test.js should flow test failed

I believe it happens because of the integration.test.js doesn’t wait for the loading promise to get resolved.

@theforeman-bot
Copy link
Member

There were the following issues with the commit message:

  • 2edd8fa must be in the format fixes #redmine_number - brief description

If you don't have a ticket number, please create an issue in Redmine.

More guidelines are available in Coding Standards or on the Foreman wiki.


This message was auto-generated by Foreman's prprocessor

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

OK, I've a few updates for this thread, I've

Added Spice
Added Editor (which also bundle patternfly-react-extensions)

I've done the following performance tests

tl;dr

  Current Proposed Difference (ms)
First Load 1677 1127 550
Average Page Load 711.4 641.8 69.6

Memory size impact is about half on initial page loads

Bundle size impact

  Current Proposed
vendor 4.57 MB 2.31 MB
bundle 896.66 KB 488.99 KB
spice   141.53 KB
noVNC   138.6 KB
Editor   1.57 MB
passwordStrength   822.92 KB

I've done a total of 7 tests for each environment (as its done manually via chrome performance developers tools, raw data at

Current ms msLoading msScripting msRendering msPainting msSystem msIdle
First Load 1677 49.3 1259.4 34.7 1.1 191.6 141.2
2 650 36.1 406.1 17 0.6 132.5 58.2
3 640 33.4 390.7 21.3 0.6 135.7 58.6
4 767 37.1 447.7 21.8 5.4 174.1 80.9
5 705 38 365.7 20.4 0.9 213.6 66.7
6 795 30.1 378.4 16 0.7 296.7 72.9
Proposed              
First Load 1127 32.7 870.5 46.4 0.9 73 103.2
2 538 28.9 315.5 16.9 0.6 87.4 88.5
3 770 8.1 291.4 14.3 0.9 118.9 336.3
4 485 11.7 297.6 15 0.6 90.6 69.7
5 653 6.3 290.9 15.1 0.7 109 230.7
6 763 8.1 298.1 16.7 0.8 101.3 338.2

If you would like to try this out, simply change your docker-compose.yml file

diff --git a/docker-compose.yml b/docker-compose.yml
index 821984ff2..16d67676e 100644
--- a/docker-compose.yml
+++ b/docker-compose.yml
@@ -20,7 +20,8 @@ services:
       - db:/var/lib/mysql/data
 
   app: &app_base
-    image: quay.io/foreman/foreman:develop
+    image: quay.io/ohadlevy/foreman:react-loadable
     command: bundle exec bin/rails server -b 0.0.0.0
     build:
       context: .

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

it also goes without saying that I was testing this on a modern machine, with zero latency, I would suspect the performance impact would be bigger on slower devices (older hardware, mobile/tables etc).

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

@glekner can you have a look if you can find a way to get the integration tests working?

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

ohadlevy commented Jun 4, 2019

/cc @sharvit @amirfefer

this reduced the vendor file by about 800kb and reduce
every full page reload by about 100ms on my machine

added novnc to its own bundle
@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member Author

@theforeman-bot
Copy link
Member

@ohadlevy, this pull request is currently not mergeable. Please rebase against the develop branch and push again.

If you have a remote called 'upstream' that points to this repository, you can do this by running:

    $ git pull --rebase upstream develop

This message was auto-generated by Foreman's prprocessor

@sharvit
Copy link
Contributor

sharvit commented Sep 23, 2019

I am sorry for the inconvenient @ohadlevy but this PR is not mergeable because it should be implemented in the vendor now.

Adding it to the foreman-js roadmap.md as it should be there:
theforeman/foreman-js#50

@ohadlevy ohadlevy closed this Sep 23, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants