Skip to content

Post GA dealbot provider detail page #177

Description

@BigLep

Done Criteria

We have a detail page for each provider with these components:

  • Date picker
    • Absolute time (UTC)
    • Relative time
  • Approval status widget
    • This is basically one row of the "Storage Provider table" in Post GA dealbot dashboard landing page #176 (comment)
    • Columns/field
      • Whether approved
      • Data Storage Success Rate
      • Data Storage Sample Count
      • Data Retention Fault Rate
      • Data Retention Proof Count
      • Retrieval Success Rate
      • Retrieval Sample Count
    • Numbers will be grey/green/red based on certain condition
      • Grey: not enough samples
      • Green: meeting acceptance criteria
      • Red: not meeting acceptance criteria
  • Metrics table
    • Display all the metrics we have on the SP
    • Layout is TBD. We can take inspiration from the SP "cards" we already have at https://dealbot.fwss.io/
    • Latencies should be shown as percentiles (e.g., p50, p90).
    • We always show counts when showing rates or percentiles
  • Failure Analysis table

Other notes:

  • URLs should be bookmarkable
    • if I change the data range, that should be reflected in the query string
    • providerId should be in the url.
    • It should be possible to load the Failure Analysis table filtered to a certain error
  • We will link to any public docs we create about our policies, metric definitions, etc.

Why Important

This allows SP Approval List managers (i.e., FOC WG SP support personnel) and potential data client to see how an SP is doing across more metrics.

User/Customer

  1. SP Approval List managers
  2. PDP SPs to see how they're doing from dealbot perspective
  3. Potential data clients who are looking on if there are certain SPs they want to use or if the SP their dataset is in is having problems.

Notes

  1. There are notes and mockups in https://linear.app/filoz/document/public-definition-of-thresholds-for-dealbot-ccf29ae32583 , but that may not have the latest understanding. Check with @BigLep as he is trying to use this issue to document what engineers ned to implement.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    enhancementNew feature or requestready-for-workTriaged: scope, plan, and DoD are clear; contributor can pick up

    Type

    No type

    Fields

    No fields configured for issues without a type.

    Projects

    Status
    🐱 Todo

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions