Run Detail Page Improvements
planned
Mattia
Enhance the user experience by improving the widgets on the run detail page without altering user flows.
The primary goals of this UI update are:
- Improve the entire page's layout by reorganizing the order of widgets and the information within them.
- Unify color and icon use to ensure consistency across the application.
Specifically:
- To enhance the usability and aesthetics of the "General" widget in run detail page, improvements will involve reordering and resizing elements, optimizing the widget for increased interactive intuitiveness, unifying icon styles to outline format, and introducing an expand/collapse functionality. This aims to address the visual imbalance caused by the increased elements such as resource labels, pipeline name, and optimization details within the widget.
- The current Process widget layout presents problems because the names can be too long and unreadable, the numeric value is unclear, and the progress bar lacks clarity. We aim to improve this by resizing and restyling the Process widget, providing an easy way to jump into tasks, and evaluate an overall progress indicator for added clarity.
- Improve the Status widget UI on the run detail page, enhancing accessibility by adjusting text color contrast, consolidating the use of colors, especially for the "Cached" status, and renaming the widget to accurately reflect its content: "Task status." These changes aim to enhance user experience and clarity in interpreting the widget information.
- The Tasks table enhancement is addressed in a separate effort.
Rob Newman
planned
Rob Newman
evaluating
Rob Newman
Merged in a post:
Draw the user's attention to runs that are "stuck" in a state
Rob Syme
It is possible to accidentally configure a run that will get "stuck" in a state where it will not submit jobs, or those jobs will never progress into a running state. Situation might include when submitting a GPU-requiring task to a queue that does not have GPUs, or submitting a job that requests more memory than is available.
These jobs will sit idle and consume resource. Once they fall off the first page on the "Runs" tab, it is possible that they go unnoticed. In such instances, it may be helpful to draw the user's attention to these misconfigured runs so that they can be cancelled, the resources cleaned up and the configuration error corrected.
Rob Newman
Inquisitive Reindeer: Thanks for your feedback. I'm merging your "Lexicographic/alphabetical sort of parameters in workflow runs" feature request into our existing
Run Detail Page Improvements
feature request which includes listing parameters in alphabetical order. The merge process automatically upvotes on your behalf.Rob Newman
Rob Newman
Merged in a post:
Workflow Run detail page improvements
L
Late Macaw
Suggested improvements on the Run detail page UI with the tabs on
Parameters
and Configuration
:Parameters tab:
- Add a search widget in the top right corner: if I need to find a specific parameter from a very long list, I can search for it and the resulting view should shrink like the task table or highlight it.
- List the parameters in alphabetical order
Configuration tab:
- Add a search widget in the top right corner: if I need to find a specific parameter from the very long resolved configuration list, I can search for it and the resulting view should shrink like the task table or highlight it.
- Add a Secretssection that displays the secret(s) used in the pipeline: Only thenameof the secret, not the value. If we havefoosecret andbaras the value, then something like:
secrets {
name = foo,
value = hidden
}
Rob Newman
Merged in a post:
Fusion version reported in the Run Details page
Rob Syme
Fusion is still actively developed and there are often significant features and bug fixes added between versions. At present, the best way to determine the version of Fusion used in a run is to open up a task working directory using the Data Explorer, download the fusion.log file and pull the version from the first line in that file.
It would be helpful to have the Fusion version information reported in the same manner as the workflow version (SHA) and Nextflow version in the "General" information box.
Mattia
Merged in a post:
Estimated run cost to include cost of failed tasks
Rob Syme
Customers often have pipelines in operation, each lasting for several days and comprising a small number of tasks. Each of the tasks can extend over several days.
In the scenario where a task experiences a failure after running for two days, the estimated run cost
does not reflect the expenses incurred during the failed run
. This discrepancy may lead business owners to believe there were no charges associated with that run, creating a misleading impression.To prevent any confusion, it's essential to include the cost of failed runs in the estimated expenditure. This adjustment will provide a more accurate representation of the actual expenses incurred.
Rob Newman
acknowledged
F
Flamingo pink Python
Hopefully its not too much scope creep, but can this also include the costs of previous runs when used with "resume"? I think there might have already been a ticket about that on here.
Load More
→