tc

TeamCity : pin and tag a build using the REST API from inside the script

We use Teamcity for most of automation in building/testing/deploying golang microservices to prod and during test phase I wanted to be able to notice easily if an integration/benchmark test crashed a microservice. Pinning the build and tagging it with the word “panic” seemed to be a good idea, from inside the buildconf script :

# txt are are the microservice logfiles, substitute as neeeded
grep panic.go *.txt
retVal=$?
if [ $retVal -eq 0 ]; then
   # grep found panic in some file, tag with panic
   nohup sh -c 'sleep 10 ; curl --header "Origin: https://<your_tc_server>" --header "Authorization: Bearer <yourbearertoken>" --request POST "%teamcity.serverUrl%/app/rest/builds/id:%teamcity.build.id%/tags/" --data panic --header "Content-type: text/plain"' &
   nohup sh -c 'sleep 10 ; curl --header "Origin: https://<your_tc_server>" --header "Authorization: Bearer <yourbearertoken>" --request PUT "%teamcity.serverUrl%/app/rest/builds/id:%teamcity.build.id%/pin/"' &
fi

Took more than expected to figure out this : some examples would be helpful. Note that the build needs to be finished to be able to pin it/tag it so we have to put this ugly sleep to postpone operations on the rest api when the build is finished.

grigna

On the importance of design in software

Many time we face situation were productivity of a software team is impaired by initial flaws in system design. These initial flaws require too much time to be completely removed (the effort of complete rewrite is only marginally touched here and is normally and indication of other problems in your software project )

So, in order for a software team to be able to work at its maximum, good design is a must. Design is much more responsible for productivity than any single coder, scrum master, product manager or development methodology/language in the sense that bad design can take an all-star team using top tools/methodology to perform badly.

There were times when it was taken for granted that before building a system, it was necessary to design it. That time looks gone (even though Agile does not explicitly prohibit making good design). The general idea seems to be that there is “never enough time to do something right, but there’s always enough time to do it over” again.

But what is design in software ?

That kind of intellectual activity which creates a whole from its diverse parts may be called the design of a system

Melvin E. Conway, How Do Committees Invent?

So you compose parts to make the whole system. How you do this ?

It is basically decomposition to generate single parts that acting together will generate the goal. The 2 tools you will need as a designer are :

  • decomposition
  • composition

 But first of all you need :

  • understanding of the system boundaries : the borders of the nation your system lives in
  • understanding the global scenario of what your system is going to do. Designing subsystems without knowing the whole picture is not a good idea.

Why decomposition of a system into smaller components (services) is good for you :

  • information hiding : well identified interfaces create a contract that the component has to provide, hiding any network/system implementation details. This will make the component implementation completely free to be modified/enhanced as long as the new implementation is compliant with the contract.
  • less development time : separate components/services can be developed in parallel since they don’t require (or require little) external dependencies, so less contention between engineers. Every component is independent on integration and performance test that can be developed autonomously.
  • scalability : with little effort in design every component might be deployed in a way to be one of many instances that will make that service scalable when traffic increases.
  • clarity : the system could be studied a component (service) at a time with the result that the whole system could be better designed because it was better understood

We could go on here and analyze what are the criteria to be used in decomposing a system into services. I’ll leave this to another moment and you can find some interesting notes here :

https://blog.acolyer.org/2016/09/05/on-the-criteria-to-be-used-in-decomposing-systems-into-modules/

What I would like to stress is that design is a fundamental phase in software engineering. You can’t just skip it and pretend that since you have a good team you’ll get a good job done.

Thanks to the following for inspiring me on this post :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melvin_Conway

https://blog.acolyer.org/2019/12/13/how-do-committees-invent/

https://blog.acolyer.org/2016/09/05/on-the-criteria-to-be-used-in-decomposing-systems-into-modules/

Benchmarking golang code

Let’s say that you want to know if EncodeToString is faster than fmt.Sprintf : you will need to compare the speed of this method

func Md5Encode(str string) string {
	md5HashInBytes := md5.Sum([]byte(str))
	md5HashInString := hex.EncodeToString(md5HashInBytes[:])
	return md5HashInString
}

with this other one

func Md5EncodeFmt(str string) string {
	md5HashInBytes := md5.Sum([]byte(str))
	md5HashInString := fmt.Sprintf("%x", md5HashInBytes)
	return md5HashInString
}

Go provides benchmarking features in the testing package which is pretty usefull :

func BenchmarkMd5EncodeFmt(b *testing.B) {
	// run the md5Encode function b.N times
	for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
		Md5EncodeFmt("aldfhasdl la fasdfeo8ekldjh asdkj fh lksdjfhwoieuxnroiAUN;laiDJ;ANIfub;OEIRBUF;OEfuN;ALFJ;AL")
	}
}

func BenchmarkMd5Encode(b *testing.B) {
	// run the md5Encode function b.N times
	for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
		Md5Encode("aldfhasdl la fasdfeo8ekldjh asdkj fh lksdjfhwoieuxnroiAUN;laiDJ;ANIfub;OEIRBUF;OEfuN;ALFJ;AL")
	}
}

Run

$ go test -bench=.
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
BenchmarkMd5EncodeFmt-8   	 1894791	       625 ns/op
BenchmarkMd5Encode-8      	 3068509	       363 ns/op
PASS
ok  	_/home/paul/LazyInit/bench	3.342s

Run 3 times the benchmarks :

$ go test -count 3 -bench=. 
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
BenchmarkMd5EncodeFmt-8   	 1882105	       627 ns/op
BenchmarkMd5EncodeFmt-8   	 1918942	       624 ns/op
BenchmarkMd5EncodeFmt-8   	 1902894	       625 ns/op
BenchmarkMd5Encode-8      	 3139585	       386 ns/op
BenchmarkMd5Encode-8      	 2937154	       397 ns/op
BenchmarkMd5Encode-8      	 3009801	       380 ns/op
PASS
ok  	_/home/paul/LazyInit/bench	10.217s

EncodeToString() makes your method almost twice faster !

In the case you need to isolate the code that will be measured from some init/fixture code you can use ResetTimer() and StopTimer() to accurately isolate what you want to measure :

func BenchmarkMd5EncodeFmt(b *testing.B) {
	// Some init code
	initRandomBenchStrings()
	b.ResetTimer()
	for n := 0; n < b.N; n++ {
		Md5EncodeFmt(getRandomstrings())
	}
	b.StopTimer()
	// some final code
}

If the function you’re measuring is very slow you might want to increase to maximum time of excecution of the benchmark (default is 1 s) with -benchtime=20s

Recap

  • without any benchmarks : go test .
  • with benchmarks (time) : go test -bench .
  • with benchmarks (time and memory) : go test -bench . -benchmem

The argument following -bench is a regular expression. All benchmark functions whose names match are executed. The . in the previous examples isn’t the current directory but a pattern matching all tests. To run a specific benchmark, use the regexp : -bench Suite (means everything containing Suite).

(thanks to https://github.com/samonzeweb/profilinggo )

Thanks year 2000 : less is (immensely) more (the 90s produced a lot of crap)

Thanks to god after year 2000 information technology has started moving towards more pragmatic, simple and effective tools and languages. Some examples that in my opinion make this evident : 

Languages and language tools

  • go, rust, swift are all born with the goal of simplifying their direct parents (c++, objectiveC) and removing their pitfalls.
  • UML abandoned : this is a relief for all coders which had to deal with it. I don’t know anyone using it nowadays.
  • git : finally some one (thanks Linux Torvalds) simplified svn/sourcesafe by putting features that are needed by developers in a clear, pretty intuitive command line interface
  • atom/sublime : reaction to the complexity of Visual Studio, IBM Rational, Eclipse ? I think yes

Databases

  • Key-value stores/noSQL are just taking ER/SQL model and making it simpler, providing only the features needed in 99% of the applications. Boyce-Codd normal form is pretty nice and interesting but in real world applications you’ll never use it. 
  • Object Databases completely disappeared and in some way also the idea that OO methodology/hierarchy could be applied everywhere (just because you are where using OO languages)

Virtualization

  • docker/rkt are slim alternatives to virtualization and virtual machines

Architectures

  • plain old REST API aren’t just a simple way for doing things without having to Corba/Soap ?
  • gRPC : provides corba like features while being 1 order of magnitude more efficent and portable on any platform.

What I’m saying is that the 90s produced a lot of unnecessarily complicated tools and technology which developer just did not need/like which is being progressively substituted with simpler stuff.

Interesting to note that the phrase “Less is more” is originally attributed to Mies Van Der Rohe for his minimalism in architecture design . Looks at his buildings : nothing more than necessary and functional elements are present.

But before him Leonardo da Vinci : “Simplicity is the Ultimate Sophistication”

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry – “Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.”

11-36 Cassette on Tiagra RD 4700 (hacking a tiagra rear derailleur)

Tiagra rear derailleur is often mounted on gravel bikes but I did not like its limit to 34 maximum cog size. My hackers attitude comes out in these situations (and I don’t care breaking the component warranty) so I decided to modify the derailleur to hold larger cogs.

The problem is that the B-Screw is short and won’t allow you to increase the distanze between the lower cogs from the upper cassette. While some tutorial suggest to put a longer b-screw, I tried what can be seen below :

I used a chain pin and insert it to make the mechanical stop longer. Some thread blocker or resin to keep it still and you’re set.

It works 🙂