Closed steve962 closed 1 year ago
Indeed, that would be better UX-wise. ⚠️ is the way to go.
@rhertogh what do you think?
@samdark I agree. Initially I implemented it as a warning, but the criticalQueryThreshold
was implemented as an error, so I used that.
So yes, I also think a warning would be better, but for consistency I would then also display an exceeding of the criticalQueryThreshold
as a warning.
I've create a PR for both criticalQueryThreshold
and excessiveCallerThreshold
: #504
What steps will reproduce the problem?
Run a page with enough database queries to be considered "excessive" queries by the new code in 2.1.23
What's expected?
Should NOT be indicating the request failed with table-danger
What do you get instead?
Is indicating the request failed somewhere along the line by marking it with table-danger
Additional info
While it's nice to have an indicator of excessive queries, these requests aren't actually failing -- this at most is a warning, and not even that - it's a suggestion to optimize your database queries. When I see a page request in the debugger marked with the table-danger style, my inclination is to go looking into that page's log in detail looking for why the request failed to complete, and if I'm debugging a complex application where some requests are succeeding and others failing, the failed requests get lost in the sea of requests marked as failed because of excessive queries.
I recommend not putting a style on it and simply leaving the little exclamation icon next to the query count as the only indicator -- that's more than sufficient to indicate that optimization ought to be considered, without burying real errors in the noise.