You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
178 lines
4.6 KiB
178 lines
4.6 KiB
# Investigation Report Example
|
|
|
|
**Author**: Matthew Raymer
|
|
**Date**: 2025-08-19
|
|
**Status**: 🎯 **ACTIVE** - Investigation methodology example
|
|
|
|
## Investigation — Registration Dialog Test Flakiness
|
|
|
|
## Objective
|
|
|
|
Identify root cause of flaky tests related to registration dialogs in contact
|
|
import scenarios.
|
|
|
|
## System Map
|
|
|
|
- User action → ContactInputForm → ContactsView.addContact() →
|
|
|
|
handleRegistrationPrompt()
|
|
|
|
- setTimeout(1000ms) → Modal dialog → User response → Registration API call
|
|
|
|
- Test execution → Wait for dialog → Assert dialog content → Click response
|
|
|
|
button
|
|
|
|
## Findings (Evidence)
|
|
|
|
- **1-second timeout causes flakiness** — evidence:
|
|
|
|
`src/views/ContactsView.vue:971-1000`; setTimeout(..., 1000) in
|
|
handleRegistrationPrompt()
|
|
|
|
- **Import flow bypasses dialogs** — evidence:
|
|
|
|
`src/views/ContactImportView.vue:500-520`; importContacts() calls
|
|
$insertContact() directly, no handleRegistrationPrompt()
|
|
|
|
- **Dialog only appears in direct add flow** — evidence:
|
|
|
|
`src/views/ContactsView.vue:774-800`; addContact() calls
|
|
handleRegistrationPrompt() after database insert
|
|
|
|
## Hypotheses & Failure Modes
|
|
|
|
- H1: 1-second timeout makes dialog appearance unpredictable; would fail when
|
|
|
|
tests run faster than 1000ms
|
|
|
|
- H2: Test environment timing differs from development; watch for CI vs local
|
|
|
|
test differences
|
|
|
|
## Corrections
|
|
|
|
- Updated: "Multiple dialogs interfere with imports" → "Import flow never
|
|
|
|
triggers dialogs - they only appear in direct contact addition"
|
|
|
|
- Updated: "Complex batch registration needed" → "Simple timeout removal and
|
|
|
|
test mode flag sufficient"
|
|
|
|
## Diagnostics (Next Checks)
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Repro on CI environment vs local
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Measure actual dialog appearance timing
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Test with setTimeout removed
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Verify import flow doesn't call handleRegistrationPrompt
|
|
|
|
## Risks & Scope
|
|
|
|
- Impacted: Contact addition tests, registration workflow tests; Data: None;
|
|
|
|
Users: Test suite reliability
|
|
|
|
## Decision / Next Steps
|
|
|
|
- Owner: Development Team; By: 2025-01-28
|
|
|
|
- Action: Remove 1-second timeout + add test mode flag; Exit criteria: Tests
|
|
|
|
pass consistently
|
|
|
|
## References
|
|
|
|
- `src/views/ContactsView.vue:971-1000`
|
|
|
|
- `src/views/ContactImportView.vue:500-520`
|
|
|
|
- `src/views/ContactsView.vue:774-800`
|
|
|
|
## Competence Hooks
|
|
|
|
- Why this works: Code path tracing revealed separate execution flows,
|
|
|
|
evidence disproved initial assumptions
|
|
|
|
- Common pitfalls: Assuming related functionality without tracing execution
|
|
|
|
paths, over-engineering solutions to imaginary problems
|
|
|
|
- Next skill: Learn to trace code execution before proposing architectural
|
|
|
|
changes
|
|
|
|
- Teach-back: "What evidence shows that contact imports bypass registration
|
|
|
|
dialogs?"
|
|
|
|
## Key Learning Points
|
|
|
|
### Evidence-First Approach
|
|
|
|
This investigation demonstrates the importance of:
|
|
|
|
1. **Tracing actual code execution** rather than making assumptions
|
|
|
|
2. **Citing specific evidence** with file:line references
|
|
|
|
3. **Validating problem scope** before proposing solutions
|
|
|
|
4. **Considering simpler alternatives** before complex architectural changes
|
|
|
|
### Code Path Tracing Value
|
|
|
|
By tracing the execution paths, we discovered:
|
|
|
|
- Import flow and direct add flow are completely separate
|
|
|
|
- The "multiple dialog interference" problem didn't exist
|
|
|
|
- A simple timeout removal would solve the actual issue
|
|
|
|
### Prevention of Over-Engineering
|
|
|
|
The investigation prevented:
|
|
|
|
- Unnecessary database schema changes
|
|
|
|
- Complex batch registration systems
|
|
|
|
- Migration scripts for non-existent problems
|
|
|
|
- Architectural changes based on assumptions
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
**Status**: Active investigation methodology
|
|
**Priority**: High
|
|
**Estimated Effort**: Ongoing reference
|
|
**Dependencies**: software_development.mdc
|
|
**Stakeholders**: Development team, QA team
|
|
|
|
## Model Implementation Checklist
|
|
|
|
### Before Investigation
|
|
|
|
- [ ] **Problem Definition**: Clearly define the problem to investigate
|
|
- [ ] **Scope Definition**: Determine investigation scope and boundaries
|
|
- [ ] **Methodology Planning**: Plan investigation approach and methods
|
|
- [ ] **Resource Assessment**: Identify required resources and tools
|
|
|
|
### During Investigation
|
|
|
|
- [ ] **Evidence Collection**: Gather relevant evidence and data systematically
|
|
- [ ] **Code Path Tracing**: Map execution flow for software investigations
|
|
- [ ] **Analysis**: Analyze evidence using appropriate methods
|
|
- [ ] **Documentation**: Document investigation process and findings
|
|
|
|
### After Investigation
|
|
|
|
- [ ] **Synthesis**: Synthesize findings into actionable insights
|
|
- [ ] **Report Creation**: Create comprehensive investigation report
|
|
- [ ] **Recommendations**: Provide clear, actionable recommendations
|
|
- [ ] **Team Communication**: Share findings and next steps with team
|
|
|