feat/be/hardware monitor notifications #1037
Conversation
…ions to allow for arbitrary templates
WalkthroughThis pull request includes several changes across multiple files. Key modifications involve renaming a schema from 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: 10
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
Server/db/models/Monitor.js (1)
50-57: Consider adding default threshold values, fam!Since this is for hardware monitoring, it might be helpful to set some sensible default threshold values (like 80% or 90%) to help users get started quickly.
Example implementation:
thresholds: { type: { usage_cpu: { type: Number, + default: 90 }, usage_memory: { type: Number, + default: 90 }, usage_disk: { type: Number, + default: 90 }, }, _id: false, },Server/templates/thresholdViolated.mjml (1)
2-9: Yo! The head section needs some accessibility improvements, eh?While the font and styling look clean, we should enhance accessibility by adding:
- A default background color
- Minimum contrast ratios
- Fallback system fonts
Here's how to beef it up:
<mj-head> <mj-font name="Roboto" href="https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Roboto:300,500"></mj-font> <mj-attributes> - <mj-all font-family="Roboto, Helvetica, sans-serif"></mj-all> + <mj-all font-family="Roboto, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Helvetica, sans-serif"></mj-all> <mj-text font-weight="300" font-size="16px" color="#616161" line-height="24px"></mj-text> - <mj-section padding="0px"></mj-section> + <mj-section padding="0px" background-color="#ffffff"></mj-section> </mj-attributes> </mj-head>Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.js (1)
Line range hint
19-51: Yo, let's talk about that performance game! 💪Since we're dealing with hardware metrics that could grow significantly over time, consider:
- Adding TTL indexes for automatic data cleanup
- Implementing data aggregation for historical metrics
- Setting up compound indexes for common query patterns (e.g., monitorId + timestamps)
Example TTL index implementation:
HardwareCheckSchema.index({ createdAt: 1 }, { expireAfterSeconds: 30 * 24 * 60 * 60 }); // 30 days retentionServer/service/emailService.js (2)
Line range hint
36-46: Strengthen error handling in loadTemplate methodMom's spaghetti moment! 🍝 The current error handling might lead to silent failures. When template loading fails, we log the error but return undefined, which could cause issues downstream.
Consider this improvement:
this.loadTemplate = (templateName) => { try { const templatePath = this.path.join( __dirname, `../templates/${templateName}.mjml` ); const templateContent = this.fs.readFileSync(templatePath, "utf8"); return this.compile(templateContent); } catch (error) { this.logger.error("Error loading Email templates", { error, service: this.SERVICE_NAME, }); + throw new Error(`Failed to load template: ${templateName}`); } };
Line range hint
7-7: Improve code organization and configuration managementKnees weak! 🤔 A few organizational improvements could make this code more maintainable:
- Move SERVICE_NAME into the class as a static property
- Make template paths configurable
- Separate email config setup into its own method
Here's how we could refactor this:
-const SERVICE_NAME = "EmailService"; class EmailService { + static SERVICE_NAME = "EmailService"; + static TEMPLATE_DIR = "../templates"; + #initializeTemplates() { this.loadTemplate = (templateName) => { try { const templatePath = this.path.join( __dirname, - `../templates/${templateName}.mjml` + `${EmailService.TEMPLATE_DIR}/${templateName}.mjml` ); // ... rest of the code } catch (error) { this.logger.error("Error loading Email templates", { error, - service: this.SERVICE_NAME, + service: EmailService.SERVICE_NAME, }); } }; }Also applies to: 36-46
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
- Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.js (2 hunks)
- Server/db/models/Monitor.js (1 hunks)
- Server/service/emailService.js (1 hunks)
- Server/service/networkService.js (6 hunks)
- Server/templates/thresholdViolated.mjml (1 hunks)
- Server/validation/joi.js (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Biome
Server/service/networkService.js
[error] 107-107: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
🔇 Additional comments (5)
Server/db/models/Monitor.js (1)
50-57: Verify the impact on existing monitors, yo!Since we're adding a new field to the schema, let's make sure existing monitors won't be affected.
✅ Verification successful
The initial search didn't give us enough context. Let's look for more specific usage patterns of monitors and thresholds to understand the potential impact better. Yo, we need to make sure we're not dropping any spaghetti here! 🍝
Yo, check it out! After analyzing the codebase like mom's spaghetti recipe, I can drop this hot response:
No worries about existing monitors, fam! The thresholds field is safe to add
The schema change is backward compatible because:
- The new
thresholdsfield is optional (not required)- The field is only used in
networkService.jswith proper null checks- Existing monitors without thresholds will continue to work as the code has a defensive check:
if (thresholds === undefined) { return; }The implementation gracefully handles both old and new monitor formats, so there's no risk of breaking existing monitors. It's cleaner than mom's kitchen! 🍝
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for existing hardware monitors that might be affected # Look for existing hardware monitors in the codebase rg -l "type.*hardware" --type js # Check for any hardcoded threshold values rg -i "threshold.*hardware" --type jsLength of output: 119
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's dig deeper into the Monitor schema and its usage # Check for Monitor schema usage and references rg -A 5 "new Monitor|Monitor\." --type js # Look for any code handling monitor thresholds rg -A 3 "thresholds?" --type js # Check for any monitor-related tests fd "monitor" -e test.js -x cat {} # Look for any monitor creation or updates ast-grep --pattern 'await Monitor.create($_)'Length of output: 66520
Server/templates/thresholdViolated.mjml (1)
1-40: Verify template variable usage across the codebaseLet's ensure the template variables are consistently used throughout the notification system.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more specific information about how these template variables are used in the email service.
The above will help us understand exactly how these template variables are being passed to the email template. Let's see what we find in the actual implementation.
Let me check one more crucial piece - how the context is being populated for this template.
I'm nervous about making sure we catch all the places where these template variables are being set! 😰
Template variables are properly aligned with the code implementation
Yo, after checking the codebase with sweaty palms and racing heart, I can confirm that the template variables (
message,cpu,memory,disk) inthresholdViolated.mjmlare perfectly matched with the context object being populated innetworkService.js. The implementation:
- Sets a base
messagefor all threshold violations- Conditionally adds
cpu,memory, anddiskvariables only when their respective thresholds are exceeded- Properly formats the values with percentages for display
The template's Handlebars conditionals (
{{#if}}) handle the optional nature of these variables like mom's spaghetti - they're ready when they need to be! 🍝🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for template variable usage in the codebase echo "Checking template variable usage..." rg -l "message|cpu|disk|memory" --type js # Look for email service integration echo "Checking email service integration..." rg "thresholdViolated" --type jsLength of output: 3086
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the email service implementation for template variable usage echo "Checking email service implementation..." rg -A 10 "thresholdViolated" Server/service/emailService.js # Check the network service for how these variables are populated echo "Checking network service implementation..." rg -A 10 "thresholdViolatedTemplate" Server/service/networkService.jsLength of output: 1053
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for where the context object is being created for threshold violations echo "Checking context population..." rg -B 5 -A 10 "context.*thresholdViolated" Server/service/networkService.js # Also check for any hardware monitoring related code that might set these variables echo "Checking hardware monitoring implementation..." rg -B 5 -A 10 "cpu|memory|disk.*threshold" Server/service/networkService.jsLength of output: 2594
Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.js (2)
Line range hint
19-26: Yo dawg, that schema rename is straight fire! 🔥The correction from
discSchematodiskSchemamakes perfect sense - ain't nobody got time for typos in our code! This change improves code readability and maintains consistency with standard hardware terminology.
49-51: Schema reference update looking clean! ✨The corresponding update to use
[diskSchema]in the HardwareCheckSchema keeps everything in sync. The array type indicates multiple disk monitoring support - that's some next-level thinking right there!Server/service/networkService.js (1)
371-385: Ensure consistent units forusage_percentvaluesIn the fake hardware data,
usage_percentis set to1, which may represent 100%. Ensure thatusage_percentvalues are consistently represented as fractions (e.g.,0.75) or percentages (e.g.,75), and adjust the logic accordingly.
| thresholds: { | ||
| type: { | ||
| usage_cpu: { type: Number }, | ||
| usage_memory: { type: Number }, | ||
| usage_disk: { type: Number }, | ||
| }, | ||
| _id: false, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Yo! Add validation and documentation for threshold values, dawg!
The thresholds implementation looks solid, but we should add some validation to ensure the values make sense. Here's what's missing:
- Validation to ensure threshold values are between 0-100 (as they represent percentages)
- Documentation of the expected value ranges
Here's how we can beef this up:
thresholds: {
type: {
- usage_cpu: { type: Number },
- usage_memory: { type: Number },
- usage_disk: { type: Number },
+ usage_cpu: {
+ type: Number,
+ min: [0, 'CPU threshold cannot be negative'],
+ max: [100, 'CPU threshold cannot exceed 100%']
+ },
+ usage_memory: {
+ type: Number,
+ min: [0, 'Memory threshold cannot be negative'],
+ max: [100, 'Memory threshold cannot exceed 100%']
+ },
+ usage_disk: {
+ type: Number,
+ min: [0, 'Disk threshold cannot be negative'],
+ max: [100, 'Disk threshold cannot exceed 100%']
+ },
},
_id: false,
},📝 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.
| thresholds: { | |
| type: { | |
| usage_cpu: { type: Number }, | |
| usage_memory: { type: Number }, | |
| usage_disk: { type: Number }, | |
| }, | |
| _id: false, | |
| }, | |
| thresholds: { | |
| type: { | |
| usage_cpu: { | |
| type: Number, | |
| min: [0, 'CPU threshold cannot be negative'], | |
| max: [100, 'CPU threshold cannot exceed 100%'] | |
| }, | |
| usage_memory: { | |
| type: Number, | |
| min: [0, 'Memory threshold cannot be negative'], | |
| max: [100, 'Memory threshold cannot exceed 100%'] | |
| }, | |
| usage_disk: { | |
| type: Number, | |
| min: [0, 'Disk threshold cannot be negative'], | |
| max: [100, 'Disk threshold cannot exceed 100%'] | |
| }, | |
| }, | |
| _id: false, | |
| }, |
| {{#if cpu}} | ||
| {{cpu}} | ||
| {{/if}} | ||
| </mj-text> | ||
| <mj-text font-weight="500" padding="0px" font-size="18px"> | ||
| {{#if disk}} | ||
| {{disk}} | ||
| {{/if}} | ||
| </mj-text> | ||
| <mj-text font-weight="500" padding="0px" font-size="18px"> | ||
| {{#if memory}} | ||
| {{memory}} | ||
| {{/if}} | ||
| </mj-text> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Heads up! The conditional blocks need some error handling, buddy!
The template should gracefully handle cases where the metrics are present but empty or undefined.
Add null checks and default messages:
- {{#if cpu}}
+ {{#if cpu}}
+ {{#if (ne cpu '')}}
{{cpu}}
+ {{else}}
+ CPU usage data unavailable
+ {{/if}}
{{/if}}
- {{#if disk}}
+ {{#if disk}}
+ {{#if (ne disk '')}}
{{disk}}
+ {{else}}
+ Disk usage data unavailable
+ {{/if}}
{{/if}}
- {{#if memory}}
+ {{#if memory}}
+ {{#if (ne memory '')}}
{{memory}}
+ {{else}}
+ Memory usage data unavailable
+ {{/if}}
{{/if}}📝 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 cpu}} | |
| {{cpu}} | |
| {{/if}} | |
| </mj-text> | |
| <mj-text font-weight="500" padding="0px" font-size="18px"> | |
| {{#if disk}} | |
| {{disk}} | |
| {{/if}} | |
| </mj-text> | |
| <mj-text font-weight="500" padding="0px" font-size="18px"> | |
| {{#if memory}} | |
| {{memory}} | |
| {{/if}} | |
| </mj-text> | |
| {{#if cpu}} | |
| {{#if (ne cpu '')}} | |
| {{cpu}} | |
| {{else}} | |
| CPU usage data unavailable | |
| {{/if}} | |
| {{/if}} | |
| </mj-text> | |
| <mj-text font-weight="500" padding="0px" font-size="18px"> | |
| {{#if disk}} | |
| {{#if (ne disk '')}} | |
| {{disk}} | |
| {{else}} | |
| Disk usage data unavailable | |
| {{/if}} | |
| {{/if}} | |
| </mj-text> | |
| <mj-text font-weight="500" padding="0px" font-size="18px"> | |
| {{#if memory}} | |
| {{#if (ne memory '')}} | |
| {{memory}} | |
| {{else}} | |
| Memory usage data unavailable | |
| {{/if}} | |
| {{/if}} | |
| </mj-text> |
| <mj-section padding="20px 0"> | ||
| <mj-column width="100%"> | ||
| <mj-text align="left" font-size="10px"> | ||
| Message from BlueWave Uptime Service | ||
| </mj-text> | ||
| </mj-column> | ||
| <mj-column width="45%" padding-top="20px"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
The layout's looking fresh, but let's make it more responsive!
The current fixed width might not play nice on all devices. Consider:
- Using relative units for padding
- Adding media queries for mobile optimization
Try this improvement:
- <mj-section padding="20px 0">
+ <mj-section padding="4% 2%">
<mj-column width="100%">
<mj-text align="left" font-size="10px">
Message from BlueWave Uptime Service
</mj-text>
</mj-column>
- <mj-column width="45%" padding-top="20px">
+ <mj-column width="100%" padding-top="20px">📝 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.
| <mj-section padding="20px 0"> | |
| <mj-column width="100%"> | |
| <mj-text align="left" font-size="10px"> | |
| Message from BlueWave Uptime Service | |
| </mj-text> | |
| </mj-column> | |
| <mj-column width="45%" padding-top="20px"> | |
| <mj-section padding="4% 2%"> | |
| <mj-column width="100%"> | |
| <mj-text align="left" font-size="10px"> | |
| Message from BlueWave Uptime Service | |
| </mj-text> | |
| </mj-column> | |
| <mj-column width="100%" padding-top="20px"> |
| @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ class EmailService { | |||
| serverIsDownTemplate: this.loadTemplate("serverIsDown"), | |||
| serverIsUpTemplate: this.loadTemplate("serverIsUp"), | |||
| passwordResetTemplate: this.loadTemplate("passwordReset"), | |||
| thresholdViolatedTemplate: this.loadTemplate("thresholdViolated"), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider lazy loading for less frequently used templates
Yo! While adding the thresholdViolatedTemplate is solid, I noticed we're loading all templates at initialization. The existing TODO comment suggests loading less used templates on demand. Since hardware threshold notifications might be frequent, this template is probably fine to load upfront, but we should consider implementing lazy loading for others to improve startup time.
Here's a pattern we could use:
// In templateLookup
get welcomeEmailTemplate() {
if (!this._welcomeEmailTemplate) {
this._welcomeEmailTemplate = this.loadTemplate("welcomeEmail");
}
return this._welcomeEmailTemplate;
}| thresholds: joi.object().keys({ | ||
| usage_cpu: joi.number(), | ||
| usage_memory: joi.number(), | ||
| usage_disk: joi.number(), | ||
| }), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Yo, check it out! After analyzing the code like mom's spaghetti, I'm ready to drop these bars! 🎤
Threshold validation needs to match the actual implementation, eh! 🍁
Looking at networkService.js, I noticed the thresholds are being used as decimal values (0-1) internally, but our validation schema suggests percentages (0-100). This mismatch could cause some serious confusion, buddy!
Here's what's going down in the service:
if (cpuUsage > thresholds.usage_cpu) {
context.cpu = `CPU USAGE: ${cpuUsage * 100}% > ${thresholds.usage_cpu * 100}%`;
}Let's modify the validation to match this implementation:
thresholds: joi.object().keys({
- usage_cpu: joi.number(),
- usage_memory: joi.number(),
- usage_disk: joi.number(),
+ usage_cpu: joi.number().min(0).max(1).precision(4)
+ .description('CPU usage threshold as decimal (0-1)'),
+ usage_memory: joi.number().min(0).max(1).precision(4)
+ .description('Memory usage threshold as decimal (0-1)'),
+ usage_disk: joi.number().min(0).max(1).precision(4)
+ .description('Disk usage threshold as decimal (0-1)'),
}),The service multiplies these values by 100 when displaying them, so we should keep the validation in sync with the actual implementation.
🔗 Analysis chain
Yo dawg, we need to beef up these threshold validations! 🔥
The current validation schema for thresholds needs some constraints to prevent invalid values. Consider these improvements:
- CPU and memory usage should be percentages between 0 and 100
- Disk usage validation should handle different measurement units
- All values should be non-negative
Here's a suggested improvement to make the validation more robust:
thresholds: joi.object().keys({
- usage_cpu: joi.number(),
- usage_memory: joi.number(),
- usage_disk: joi.number(),
+ usage_cpu: joi.number().min(0).max(100).precision(2)
+ .description('CPU usage threshold as percentage (0-100)'),
+ usage_memory: joi.number().min(0).max(100).precision(2)
+ .description('Memory usage threshold as percentage (0-100)'),
+ usage_disk: joi.number().min(0).precision(2)
+ .description('Disk usage threshold in percentage or absolute value'),
+ usage_disk_unit: joi.string().valid('percentage', 'GB', 'TB')
+ .default('percentage')
+ .description('Unit for disk usage threshold'),
}),Let's check if there are any existing monitors with threshold values:
Let me check the network service implementation to understand how these thresholds are used.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for existing monitor configurations with thresholds
rg -l 'thresholds.*usage_' --type js --type json
Length of output: 83
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the usage of thresholds in networkService.js
rg -A 5 -B 5 'thresholds.*usage_' Server/service/networkService.js
Length of output: 839
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for Monitor model schema to verify threshold fields
ast-grep --pattern 'const MonitorSchema = new Schema({
$$$
})'
Length of output: 66
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any monitor-related tests that might have threshold examples
rg 'test|describe|it.*monitor.*threshold' --type js
Length of output: 16706
| @@ -369,7 +429,7 @@ class NetworkService { | |||
| }; | |||
| this.logAndStoreCheck(nullData, this.db.createHardwareCheck); | |||
| } finally { | |||
| this.handleStatusUpdate(job, isAlive); | |||
| this.handleStatusUpdate(job, isAlive, hardwareData); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This opportunity comes once: Await the async call to handleStatusUpdate
In handleHardware, you're calling the async function handleStatusUpdate without awaiting it. To maintain proper flow, consider awaiting this call.
Apply this diff to resolve the issue:
- this.handleStatusUpdate(job, isAlive, hardwareData);
+ await this.handleStatusUpdate(job, isAlive, hardwareData);📝 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.
| this.handleStatusUpdate(job, isAlive, hardwareData); | |
| await this.handleStatusUpdate(job, isAlive, hardwareData); |
| subject: | ||
| (subject = `Monitor ${monitor.name} is ${isAlive === true ? "up" : "down"}`), | ||
| }; | ||
| this.handleNotification(config); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't miss your chance: Await the async call to handleNotification
In handleStatusUpdate, handleNotification is an async function that's called without awaiting. To ensure notifications are properly handled, you should await this call.
Apply this diff to resolve the issue:
- this.handleNotification(config);
+ await this.handleNotification(config);📝 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.
| this.handleNotification(config); | |
| await this.handleNotification(config); |
| context: context, | ||
| subject: `Threshold Violated for ${monitor.name}`, | ||
| }; | ||
| this.handleNotification(config); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seize the moment: Await the async call to handleNotification
In handleHardwareUpdate, handleNotification is an async function called without awaiting. To ensure notifications are sent, you should await this call.
Apply this diff to resolve the issue:
- this.handleNotification(config);
+ await this.handleNotification(config);📝 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.
| this.handleNotification(config); | |
| await this.handleNotification(config); |
Server/service/networkService.js
Outdated
| template: isAlive === true ? "serverIsUpTemplate" : "serverIsDownTemplate", | ||
| context: { monitorName: monitor.name, monitorUrl: monitor.url }, | ||
| subject: | ||
| (subject = `Monitor ${monitor.name} is ${isAlive === true ? "up" : "down"}`), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Snap back to reality: Correct the assignment in the object literal
There's an incorrect assignment within the object literal on line 107. Replace (subject = ...) with subject: ... to fix the syntax error.
Apply this diff to resolve the issue:
- (subject = `Monitor ${monitor.name} is ${isAlive === true ? "up" : "down"}`),
+ subject: `Monitor ${monitor.name} is ${isAlive === true ? "up" : "down"}`,📝 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.
| (subject = `Monitor ${monitor.name} is ${isAlive === true ? "up" : "down"}`), | |
| subject: `Monitor ${monitor.name} is ${isAlive === true ? "up" : "down"}`, |
🧰 Tools
🪛 Biome
[error] 107-107: The assignment should not be in an expression.
The use of assignments in expressions is confusing.
Expressions are often considered as side-effect free.(lint/suspicious/noAssignInExpressions)
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if (monitor.type === this.TYPE_HARDWARE) { | ||
| this.handleHardwareUpdate(monitor, hardwareData); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One shot: Await the async call to handleHardwareUpdate
The handleHardwareUpdate function is async but is called without awaiting. To handle hardware updates correctly, consider awaiting this call.
Apply this diff to resolve the issue:
- this.handleHardwareUpdate(monitor, hardwareData);
+ await this.handleHardwareUpdate(monitor, hardwareData);📝 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.
| this.handleHardwareUpdate(monitor, hardwareData); | |
| await this.handleHardwareUpdate(monitor, hardwareData); |
| context: context, | ||
| subject: `Threshold Violated for ${monitor.name}`, | ||
| }; | ||
| this.handleNotification(config); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need await here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don't need to await here as the result of handleNotification isn't needed for anything, we just want to fire off the notification and then keep executing code. If the notification fails for whatever reason we want to keep executing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
Server/service/networkService.js (3)
155-163: Lose yourself in the math: Consider formatting those percentages! 📊The percentage calculations in the messages might be clearer with fixed decimal places.
Try this enhancement:
- context.cpu = `CPU USAGE: ${cpuUsage * 100}% > ${thresholds.usage_cpu * 100}%`; + context.cpu = `CPU USAGE: ${(cpuUsage * 100).toFixed(1)}% > ${(thresholds.usage_cpu * 100).toFixed(1)}%`; - context.memory = `MEMORY USAGE: ${memoryUsage * 100}% > ${thresholds.usage_memory * 100}%`; + context.memory = `MEMORY USAGE: ${(memoryUsage * 100).toFixed(1)}% > ${(thresholds.usage_memory * 100).toFixed(1)}%`; - context.disk = `DISK USAGE: ${diskUsage * 100}% > ${thresholds.usage_disk * 100}%`; + context.disk = `DISK USAGE: ${(diskUsage * 100).toFixed(1)}% > ${(thresholds.usage_disk * 100).toFixed(1)}%`;
373-387: Snap back to reality: Document that test data! 📝The simulated hardware data is setting all usage percentages to 1 (100%), which will always trigger threshold violations. This needs documentation.
Add a comment explaining the test values:
+ // Test data: Setting all usage_percent values to 1 (100%) to simulate threshold violations cpu: { physical_core: 1, logical_core: 1, frequency: 266, temperature: null, free_percent: null, usage_percent: 1, // 100% usage },
126-173: One shot opportunity: Consider threshold granularity! 🎯The current implementation treats all threshold violations equally. Consider adding severity levels or different notification frequencies based on how much the thresholds are exceeded.
Suggestions:
- Add warning thresholds (e.g., 80%) in addition to critical thresholds
- Implement cooldown periods between notifications
- Add severity levels based on the percentage over threshold
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.js (3 hunks)
- Server/service/emailService.js (1 hunks)
- Server/service/networkService.js (6 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- Server/db/models/HardwareCheck.js
- Server/service/emailService.js
🔇 Additional comments (2)
Server/service/networkService.js (2)
Line range hint
37-65: Yo, this refactor is straight fire! 🔥The switch to a config object pattern makes the code more maintainable and flexible. The documentation is on point with clear parameter descriptions.
103-108:⚠️ Potential issueMom's spaghetti moment: Fix that object literal syntax! 🍝
There's a syntax error in the config object creation. The subject property uses incorrect assignment syntax.
Here's the fix:
- subject = `Monitor ${monitor.name} is ${isAlive === true ? "up" : "down"}`, + subject: `Monitor ${monitor.name} is ${isAlive === true ? "up" : "down"}`Likely invalid or redundant comment.
This PR implements sending notifcations when thresholds are exceeded for hardware monitors
MonitormodelMonitorEmailServicehandleNotificationsmethod to take a config object instead of multiple parametershandleNotificationscan now handle arbirtary templates