Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Dataset quality] Services and Host limits #181579

Open
yngrdyn opened this issue Apr 24, 2024 · 6 comments
Open

[Dataset quality] Services and Host limits #181579

yngrdyn opened this issue Apr 24, 2024 · 6 comments
Labels
Feature:Dataset Health Team:obs-ux-logs Observability Logs User Experience Team

Comments

@yngrdyn
Copy link
Contributor

yngrdyn commented Apr 24, 2024

In the flyout summary we limited the number of services and hosts we are "discovering" from logs.

image

Currently the limit is set to 50 for both, services and hosts.

❓ Open questions

  • What options do we have to communicate about this limits to the user?
  • Should we invest in doing something more custom? I saw for example in Host page the following
image
@yngrdyn yngrdyn added Team:obs-ux-logs Observability Logs User Experience Team Feature:Dataset Health labels Apr 24, 2024
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

Pinging @elastic/obs-ux-logs-team (Team:obs-ux-logs)

@ruflin
Copy link
Member

ruflin commented Apr 25, 2024

As users will not be able to see the full hosts / service list here, I wonder if we could just use an indicator for the number. If the number is low <10, we might show the exact number. If the number is >10, we just show > 10 and user can jump to the host / service page to get the precise answer. This could also help with performance potentially.

Side note: I'm thinking of a similar approach to docs count and degraded docs. As soon as we have large numbers, do we need the exact cound or would be 4k detailed enough? Having the very precise numbers might make it even harder for the user to quickly consume the numbers. 776.0 KB sounds very precise!

@isaclfreire
Copy link

I don't think users would expect to customize the number of results they see, so I would exclude the Hosts approach, which feels a bit more like a pagination setting. I'm ok with having ranges or being approximative as ruflin suggests, as long as I am able to click on it and get the full list of results that should be fine.

@isaclfreire
Copy link

I was wondering a couple of things:

1- Should make the number of services or hosts clickable, instead of having a 'show all' CTA?
image

2- Should we remove the (total) from the Docs count label since we added the time picker? It should reflect the last 24h as the other metrics, right?

3- Is it more useful to have the exact number of degraded docs, or just expose the percentage of degraded docs?

@ruflin
Copy link
Member

ruflin commented May 2, 2024

Is it more useful to have the exact number of degraded docs, or just expose the percentage of degraded docs?

Is the docs count we have there at the moment total or degraded? It would be nice to have both (15/10k), 1%, but could we combine it into one box?

@isaclfreire
Copy link

@ruflin i think for now the metric is absolute. i'll look into having both separated

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Feature:Dataset Health Team:obs-ux-logs Observability Logs User Experience Team
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants