Issues with Analysis SI

[paigeduffey]

There seem to be some issues with the Analysis SI (sys_app.do?sys_id=0f7b73c4dba433007d159235ca96197c)

• Takes an exceedingly long time to run when saving large code blocks (to be expected, but a bit of a bother when you're trying to make some tweaks to a large script include... even when trying to update the Analysis SI it took some time to update... at least 60+ seconds)
• Regularly pop-ups an error about "do not hard code sys_ids" even when no hard coded sys_id's exist in the code (again it popped this code up even on the Analysis SI)

[jacebenson]

There must be a better way to handle this, so the code isn't slow... A workaround is to not use this code analysis. But that I don't think is acceptable. This is a great call out. The sys_id code is using the regex here; https://github.com/jacebenson/servicenow-code/blob/master/update/sys_script_include_c5c833f54f55f700c660b1d18110c78e.xml#L141

/('|"|`)[a-f0-9]{32}('|"|\`)/gm

I'm trying to think of ways to do this differently. Perhaps live updates of issues is not feasible and only a report against logs is a better way. What do you think Paige? No one else is piping up, so your input is appreciated.

[paigeduffey]

Yea. I certainly think the real time alerts are wonderful in concept, but they were causing some major lag!

An after the fact code analysis would be really cool. There's something out on the store for free right now (By Evergreen), but I think you're doing some checks that they do not do (like hard coding sysids :) ) that would be really nice.

We primarily grabbed this for the code search (which is fab, btw), so this analysis was an added bonus. Always looking for things to make our Code Reviews go faster though (especially as we bring on more citizen developers).

[jacebenson]

I think that’s great you are using it. I’ve been meaning to expand the tests to include all the “Ace” report findings but I have yet to get a copy of one to get their list.

So here’s my thoughts on the lag.

• drop the real-time lookups. Instead do them ;
  • ad-hoc via a ui action or
  • onload client script (I don’t like this idea) or
  • dedicated sp page to show records with issues

[paigeduffey]

I do like the UI Action idea! Run it when you want to run it.

[jacebenson]

Sounds good. I'll make the change. Keep the property to control visibility.

[jacebenson]

Seems that for UI Actions and client scripts I can't pick business rules, script includes or client scripts... So that leaves a dedicated sp page or instructions to add a ui aciton to global scope.

[paigeduffey]

Hmm...what about a Script Action? (UI Action triggers event, even triggers Script Action)

[jacebenson]

That's the problem. On UI Action I can't tell it to exist on the business rule or script include tables.

[jacebenson]

I wonder in looking at th script include br i see problems.. maybe correcting them will make it more performant

[jacebenson]

In the mean time I think I corrected a error on the Analysis script include so it should inspect the one script include, not all of them and that may be faster.