Closed amprokop closed 5 years ago
@cmgiven — just got some thoughts down here since I was thinking through a few things. Feel free to edit or add.
I like the idea of doing 10 simultaneous distributions.
The looker dashboard should have some of the same metrics we used when simulating:
What are your thoughts on 8? Is running the round robin script a pain? My initial sense is that it's not worth doing further work as it has no real connection to how things will work after AMA day, but you know better here.
Running the round robin script isn't too much of a pain, although it would be better to automate it!
The vague thought I had was that adding RAMP appeals to legacy case distribution could possibly be a step towards adding all AMA appeals. We could just add 1 RAMP appeal from the top of that queue to each legacy case distribution, and test a bit of the logic we'll need on February 14th (task creation, etc) that way.
It might be increased effort explaining/selling this to the Board, or maybe I'm overestimating how much of a halfway step it would be, though. Any thoughts?
I don't immediately see anything that advances us toward AMA case distribution. It's a single case, it uses different definitions of ready than post-2/14, etc.
Got it, sounds good then 👍
Suggested two judges to DVC Osborne. Looking like Judges Amy Ishizawar and Paul Sorisio will participate.
Cool. Continuing with testing on this today.
Dumping some steps i took to test this locally here:
fire up shoryuken
shoryuken start -q caseflow_development_high_priority -R
ensure that the StartDistributionJob
is run with perform_later
even in dev mode so it hits shoryuken, so we can test what happens when a bunch of jobs are queued up at the same time
Run the following code
# clean up
JudgeTask.destroy_all && Distribution.destroy_all && DistributedCase.destroy_all && VACOLS::Decass.destroy_all
VACOLS::CaseHearing.destroy_all
vacols_ids = VACOLS::Case.all.map(&:bfkey) VACOLS::Case.batch_update_vacols_location("81", vacols_ids) VACOLS::Case.update_all(bfmpro: "ACT")
judges = Judge.list_all[0..10].select(&:judge_in_vacols?)
judges = judges.select { |judge| Constants::AttorneyJudgeTeams::JUDGES[Rails.current_env][judge.css_id].present? }
VACOLS::CaseDocket.counts_by_priority_and_readiness
judges.map { |judge| QueueRepository.tasks_for_user(judge.css_id).count }
judges.each { |judge| RequestStore[:current_user] = judge; Distribution.create!(judge: judge) }
judges.map { |judge| QueueRepository.tasks_for_user(judge.css_id).count }
VACOLS::CaseDocket.counts_by_priority_and_readiness
DistributedCase.all.map(&:case_id).uniq.count == DistributedCase.count
judges = Judge.list_all[11..20].select(&:judge_in_vacols?) judges = judges.select { |judge| Constants::AttorneyJudgeTeams::JUDGES[Rails.current_env][judge.css_id].present? } judges.each { |judge| RequestStore[:current_user] = judge; Distribution.create!(judge: judge) }
judges.map { |judge| QueueRepository.tasks_for_user(judge.css_id).count }
<- we're out of nonpriority appeals and the priority target is 1 so this is expected
@cmgiven — i poked around at this quite a bit locally and wasn't able to find any problems. 🎊 I think I'm satisfied with manual testing.
@cmgiven @laurjpeterson — anything on your ends that we'd need to button up before starting the pilot of this? I'm pretty satisfied.
After thinking about it, I think we should create the Looker dashboard after the first 2 users make their first distributions, so we'll have data to view.
🎉 Excellent! The only thing left to do is to communicate to our two pilot judges and feature toggle. I'll let them know that they should stop requesting cases using the spreadsheet, and that they will need to assign out all of their cases in order to first see the functionality. I can send this email out today!
What is the feature toggle called?
Then, we can create the Looker dashboard. I'd like to pair with @cmgiven to create visualizations for each of these metrics.
Pairing sounds great. Feature toggle is automatic_case_distribution.
Related to https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/caseflow/issues/5575.
8. Integrate RAMP cases into auto-case distribution? (needs separate spec)