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

Adding CICD pipeline dashboard #65

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

bblinder
Copy link

A dashboard to monitor a CI/CD pipeline deployment. Many variables like chart names and signal names are there for demonstration purposes and can be adjusted to fit the specific use case.

@bblinder
Copy link
Author

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA

@bblinder
Copy link
Author

I have read the Code of Conduct and I hereby accept the Terms

@rcastley
Copy link
Collaborator

(Copied from closed PR) - The generator behind the CI/CD pipeline demo is not public, this is a public repo so just wondering how the public would use/benefit from this.

Internally, this is awesome just trying to understand the benefits of inclusion in a public repo.

@bblinder
Copy link
Author

(Copied from closed PR) - The generator behind the CI/CD pipeline demo is not public, this is a public repo so just wondering how the public would use/benefit from this.

Internally, this is awesome just trying to understand the benefits of inclusion in a public repo.

I'm not too worried about the data generation behind the scenes for this demo, or whether it works outside its demo environment. The idea is to show an example of a custom dashboard that speaks to a particularly resonant use-case.

"We didn't know you could even do that" is a common refrain when shown to prospects. The idea that you could show -- in real time -- metrics, logs, and notable events around a code push, and most importantly having business context around all of these, is a major differentiator that has sparked some good ideas around what's possible.

Caveating that this is an example of an "optimized" workflow, I'm happy to make it even more general/templatized so it can be made to work more easily in any environment, provided the end user has an idea of what they want to monitor. To get it to "minimally viable" and somewhat working OOTB, we can tweak it to include default dimensions or signals that would likely already be in an environment.

Thoughts?

Copy link
Collaborator

@greatestusername-splunk greatestusername-splunk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Couple asks re: documentation and variables. Specifically how are Events used/useful and can they be described more in the docs?

Comment on lines +51 to +55
variable "push_event_name" {
description = "The event name to push to the event feed"
default = "canary push event"
type = string
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might be worth adding a section to the README.md calling out "Events" and this variable and how the dashboard uses events?
Users might like that context about why they would use events and which events would be useful for this dashboard.

Comment on lines +10 to +12
C = events(eventType='Automated Rollback initiated').publish(label='C')
B = events(eventType='${var.push_event_name}').publish(label='B')
A = alerts(detector_name='CI/CD Service Outlier').publish(label='A')
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might be worth calling out these static named events/alerts in the README.md and how they are useful.

Might also consider making them changable as a variable so users can add their own "automated roll back" events and the detector name they want?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants