Difference between revisions of "IS480 Team wiki: 2018T1 analyteaka metrics"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 146: | Line 146: | ||
!style="color:#7D5B53; text-align: center; background-color:#ffffff;"| 6 | !style="color:#7D5B53; text-align: center; background-color:#ffffff;"| 6 | ||
|style="text-align: center;"| 13 | |style="text-align: center;"| 13 | ||
− | |style="text-align: center;"| | + | |style="text-align: center;"| 55 |
|style="text-align: center;"| 14 | |style="text-align: center;"| 14 | ||
|style="text-align: center;"| 0 | |style="text-align: center;"| 0 | ||
|style="text-align: center;"| 51 | |style="text-align: center;"| 51 | ||
− | |style="text-align: center;"| | + | |style="text-align: center;"| 55 |
|style="text-align: center;"| 108% | |style="text-align: center;"| 108% | ||
|style="text-align: left;"| Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. | |style="text-align: left;"| Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. | ||
Line 156: | Line 156: | ||
!style="color:#7D5B53; text-align: center; background-color:#ffffff;"| 7 | !style="color:#7D5B53; text-align: center; background-color:#ffffff;"| 7 | ||
− | |style="text-align: center;"| | + | |style="text-align: center;"| 9 |
− | |style="text-align: center;"| | + | |style="text-align: center;"| 64 |
− | |style="text-align: center;"| | + | |style="text-align: center;"| 9 |
− | |style="text-align: center;"| | + | |style="text-align: center;"| 0 |
− | |style="text-align: center;"| | + | |style="text-align: center;"| 59 |
− | |style="text-align: center;"| | + | |style="text-align: center;"| 64 |
− | |style="text-align: center;"| | + | |style="text-align: center;"| 113% |
− | |style="text-align: left;"| | + | |style="text-align: left;"| Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. |
|- | |- | ||
Revision as of 19:00, 1 September 2018
We used a combination of task metric calculations to track our progress of task completion through the project.
- Quantitative Task Metric Measure to gauge task estimation efforts and appropriate action taken to address any over/underestimations
Calculation of Task Metric Score
Task Metric Score = (Actual Tasks Completed / Planned Tasks to Complete) x 100%
Score | Action |
---|---|
< 50% | Team is very significantly behind schedule, advise contacting supervisor for advice, re-estimation of tasking and dropping of non-essential functionality. |
50% to 90% | Team is behind schedule, consider number of tasks attempted and circumstances, advise re-estimation of tasking. |
90% to 110% | Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. |
110% to 150% | Team is ahead of schedule. Effort required to complete task is over-estimated. |
> 150% | Team is very significantly ahead of schedule schedule, advise contacting supervisor for advice and re-estimation of tasking. |
Iteration | Number Of Tasks | Total Complete | Completed within the same iteration | Completed within a different iteration | Planned Cumulative Task Count | Actual Cumulative Task Count | Task Metrics | Action |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 100% | Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. |
2 | 9 | 17 | 9 | 0 | 17 | 17 | 100% | Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. |
3 | 6 | 23 | 6 | 0 | 23 | 23 | 100% | Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. |
4 | 5 | 28 | 5 | 0 | 28 | 28 | 100% | Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. |
5 | 10 | 42 | 14 | 0 | 38 | 42 | 140% | Team is ahead of schedule. Effort required to complete task is over-estimated. Re-estimate tasks for future iterations. Add the number of days gained to buffer days. |
6 | 13 | 55 | 14 | 0 | 51 | 55 | 108% | Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. |
7 | 9 | 64 | 9 | 0 | 59 | 64 | 113% | Team is on schedule, carry on with current estimation of tasks. |
8 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
9 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
10 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
11 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
12 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
13 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
14 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Calculation of Impact Score
Total = 1 x num (low) + 5 x num (high) + 10 x num (critical)
Severity | Description |
---|---|
Low Impact (Score: 1) | Inconsequential. Simple typo error or minor user interface misalignment. |
High Impact (Score: 5) | Non-critical functionalities are not working, but still system runs. |
Critical Impact (Score: 10) | The system or core functionality is down. Immediate attention is required |
Mitigation Plan
Points in Iteration | Action |
---|---|
Points =< 10 | Fix during buffer time only. |
10 < Points < 20 | Use the planned debugging time. |
Points >= 20 | Stop current development and resolve the bug immediately. Reschedules the project. |
Iteration | Impact | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Low | High | Critical | |||
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
7 | - | - | - | ||
8 | - | - | - | ||
9 | - | - | - | ||
10 | - | - | - | ||
11 | - | - | - | ||
12 | - | - | - | ||
13 | - | - | - | ||
14 | - | - | - |
Issues metrics show the issues that surfaced during the course of our project. As well as steps being taken to resolve it.
# | Iteration | Issues | Module | Priority | Initiator | Status | Open on | Closed on | Action taken |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 3 | Client requested everything to be done on Google standard engine. However, machine learning cannot be done on standard. It would require a flexible or VM instance. | Backend | High | Chester Ong | Closed | 20/6/18 | 22/6/18 | Adding compute engine as the backend. |
2 | 5 | During integration, we discovered issues with running flask and dash concurrently. Therefore we decide to use iframe or run dash on flask or flask on dash. | Visualization | High | Larry | Closed | 9/7/18 | 9/7/18 | Use iframe to integrate dash and flask. |
3 | 5 | Server log shows unauthorized user from China trying to ssh into our compute engine. However, we are not at the stage of whitelisting IP currently. Therefore, we need an alternative solution for security hardening. | Backend | Medium | Solomon | Closed | 13/7/18 | 13/7/18 | "Proceed with hardening
Non-default SSH port Uncomplicated Firewall Disabled root access Disabled password RSA key only LogWatch enabled Fail2ban enabled " |
4 | 6 | We realize gender has no bearing on the customer clustering result as purchasing decision tends to be made as a family. Therefore, we would need a different formula to cluster customer. | Machine learning | low | Hong yang | Closed | 24/7/18 | 25/7/18 | Dropping gender and use house size, household income, age, race and district for clustering purpose |
5 | 7 | Notice high swap on the compute engine system. This affects the performance of the system, increasing load time by 230% (based on browser inspector) | Backend | Medium | Solomon | Closed | 8/8/18 | 8/8/18 | Increase compute engine instance size from f1-micro to g1-small and activate auto scaling for app engine. Will monitor for the next few iter before deciding on CPU and ram size for custom machine size.
Adding of gunicorn with 2 workers threads |
6 | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example |
7 | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example |
8 | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example |
9 | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example |
10 | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example | Example |