pm host/port could have defaults, or at least consistent suggested values

strongloop / strong-arc

StrongLoop Arc has been replaced by API Connect. We recommend Arc users move to the Essentials edition of API Connect. If you have questions, please email reachsl@us.ibm.com.

http://strongloop.com/

Other

114 stars 36 forks source link

pm host/port could have defaults, or at least consistent suggested values #718

Open sam-github opened 9 years ago

sam-github commented 9 years ago

I didn't choose an slc pm default port because I couldn't think of a good choice.

But it appears the UI has chosen one for me... I suggest that the --listen for slc pm become optional, and the port default to 8000 (or some other number that the UI and slc pm agree on).

sam-github commented 9 years ago

I note that the pm port defaults to 8000 in build-deploy, but to 4300 in metrics... all the PM port defaults should be the same!

sam-github commented 9 years ago

Actually, they aren't really defaults ... :-( you have to type them in. How about we make them all defaults?

And actually, making host default to localhost isn't such a bad idea, either.

sam-github commented 9 years ago

And the suggested values are different again in the profiler tab.

chandadharap commented 9 years ago

Adding a UX label.

seanbrookes commented 9 years ago

I'm not sure how we could guess at what the user has set up.

At least now we capture the values the user uses after the first time so it is remembered for them - a bit of a wip still but better than having to manually have to type each time or try to guess

sam-github commented 9 years ago

I'm not sure how we could guess at what the user has set up.

I think I should give pm a default port, so the default would become a good guess.

In the three locations in the UI that I checked, each one offered a different greyed-out port number in the PM port box (deploy, heap/cpu profile, metrics graphing). That at least should be changed, I assume its a tiny tweak. And that if the port box code becomes some kind of shared widget (maybe it did?), then all the instantiations would naturally become identical.

seanbrookes commented 9 years ago

the amalgamation of that component into shared one is underway.

The 3 'versions' of port you are currently seeing:

there is a 'placeholder' value (I thnk 4800) the is just a display value for initial load (probably a little confusing so we should clear this out)
if you have a valid remote host you will see the port number in the input
you might also see 9999 which is going to go away as it simply represents the internal local pm. This is going to be displayed as a read only value: '----' instead of the port input element

seanbrookes commented 9 years ago

screenshot the coming implementation for internal pm selected

sam-github commented 9 years ago

I wasn't sure what to call it, but yes, the "placeholder values" were different in all the spots.

@chandadharap @rmg Set a default port for pm? I think it would be a good idea. We just have to choose an obscure one. Maybe 9090? 8081? @rmg, thoughts on a decent default, likely to work on most linux/aws/docker boxes? Maybe even 8080, though that is commonly used for a non-standard HTTP port.

chandadharap commented 9 years ago

Not 8080, but uncommon one.

On Saturday, December 13, 2014, Sam Roberts notifications@github.com wrote:

I wasn't sure what to call it, but yes, the "placeholder values" were different in all the spots.

@chandadharap https://github.com/chandadharap @rmg https://github.com/rmg Set a default port for pm? I think it would be a good idea. We just have to choose an obscure one. Maybe 9090? 8081? @rmg https://github.com/rmg, thoughts on a decent default, likely to work on most linux/aws/docker boxes? Maybe even 8080, though that is commonly used for a non-standard HTTP port.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/strongloop/strong-arc/issues/718#issuecomment-66884658 .

Chanda Dharap Director, Engineering @StrongLoop Inc (510) 304-3924 chanda@strongloop.com

StrongLoop http://strongloop.com/* makes it easy to develop APIs http://strongloop.com/mobile-application-development/loopback/ in Node, plus get DevOps capabilities http://strongloop.com/node-js-performance/strongops/ like monitoring, debugging and clustering*.

seanbrookes commented 9 years ago

so we are talking about a real port here where users will 'find' their internal pm instance - as opposed to a symbolic one only for 'showing' to the user?

rmg commented 9 years ago

I suggest 8701. It is relatively low, starts with 8 like most http service ports, is unprivileged, has no common associations, and isn't an IANA reserved number. As a bonus, it is a reference to the address of our HQ. 8701 <-> 107 B Street.

rmg commented 9 years ago

This also implies changing strong-pm to no longer require the -l option to specify a port, given a "sane" default.

sam-github commented 9 years ago

I like it. Maybe after arc releases.. I think this missed the window!

rmg commented 9 years ago

Agreed. strong-pm@1.6.0!

seanbrookes commented 9 years ago

do we have consensus on what this story should be?

chandadharap commented 9 years ago

@sam-github for comments

sam-github commented 9 years ago

strong-pm should default to port 8701, if a more specific one was not suggested
arc should have a default pm port of 8701 for REMOTE pm's in the build/deploy tab, metrics tab, and profiling tab (the internal PM will always be an ephemeral port, the port isn't exposed, and the existing code is fine)

I think this change is trivial in both pm and arc, maybe 1 point for each of them.

seanbrookes commented 9 years ago

not sure if this is work we actually want to do

sam-github commented 9 years ago

I haven't see the latest arc UI, but if people are still punching pm ports into boxes, I think we should consider it. Its pretty easy, and removes a lot of magic numbers.