feat(synthetics): safe canary update

[badmintoncryer]

Issue # (if applicable)

None

Reason for this change

AWS CloudWatch synthetics supports for performing safe canary update.

This feature cannot be configurable from AWS CDK L2 construct.

Description of changes

• Add dryRunAndUpdate prop to canaryProps
• Add runtime validation
  • syn-nodejs-puppeteer-10.0+
  • syn-nodejs-playwright-2.0+
  • syn-python-selenium-5.1+

Describe any new or updated permissions being added

None

Description of how you validated changes

Add both unit and integ tets.

Checklist

• My code adheres to the CONTRIBUTING GUIDE and DESIGN GUIDELINES

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

[mazyu36]

Thank you for the contribution.
Some minor comments.

[mazyu36]

Is validation needed when dryRunAndUpdate is false?

[badmintoncryer]

You're right! I've updated to validate when only dryRunAndUpdate is true.

[mazyu36]

IMO, this validation seems a bit overkilled. But I'd like to wait for the maintainers' opinion on this.

[alvazjor]

The validation adds value, but it could be simplified. Could you please explain why you did not use the available runtime values to check against? Having a collection of the supported runtime versions and then checking if the provided one is any of the supported ones would likely be a simpler approach.

[badmintoncryer]

This feature is defined as being available in versions syn-nodejs-puppeteer-10.0+, syn-nodejs-playwright-2.0+, and syn-python-selenium-5.1+. Currently, only puppeteer-10.0, playwright-2.0, and selenium-5.1 are the available versions, but they should continue to increase in the future.
I think it would be quite cumbersome to keep updating the available versions each time this happens.
What are your thoughts on this?

[badmintoncryer]

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudWatch/latest/monitoring/performing-safe-canary-upgrades.html

[alvazjor]

Updating the collection to add future supported versions may be cumbersome, but the same applies to handling future deprecated versions. At some point, the minimum supported version could be deprecated, requiring an update to the logic. This is likely an unavoidable aspect of the project.

With that in mind, I'd still rather have a simpler logic in place. So what do you think about using a regex expression that separates the runtimeName string into the runtime family ('syn-nodejs-puppeteer', 'syn-nodejs-playwright', etc) and the version number? We could keep a single object (let's say it's called MIN_SUPPORTED_VERSIONS or something similar) that has the supported family names as the keys, and the minimum version as the values. Then, you will just need to match the runtimeName to the regex and use the object to see if the matched family exists in the MIN_SUPPORTED_VERSIONS and if the version part is equal to or greater than the value of that key.

Something like:

const RUNTIME_REGEX = /^syn-(nodejs-puppeteer|nodejs-playwright|python-selenium)-(\d+\.\d+)$/;
const MIN_SUPPORTED_VERSIONS: { [family: string]: number } = {
  'nodejs-puppeteer': 10.0,
  'nodejs-playwright': 2.0,
  'python-selenium': 5.1
};

 const match = runtimeName.match(RUNTIME_REGEX);

  // If the runtime name doesn't match our expected pattern, it's not supported
  if (!match || match.length < 3) {
    return false;
  }

  const family = match[1];
  const version = parseFloat(match[2]);
  const minVersion = MIN_SUPPORTED_VERSIONS[family];


  // Check if this family is in our object and if the version meets the minimum
  return minVersion !== undefined && version >= minVersion;

what do you think?

[badmintoncryer]

@alvazjor Thank you for your suggestion. I've updated my implementation like that. Could you please confirm again?

[badmintoncryer]

@mazyu36 Thank you for your review! I've updated my implementation.

IMO, this validation seems a bit overkilled. But I'd like to wait for the maintainers' opinion on this.

I can understand your opinion. I'll also wait for maintainer's review.

[mazyu36]

Thanks. LGTM.

[alvazjor]

@badmintoncryer Thank you for your contribution. Added one comment.

[alvazjor]

Thanks for the contribution

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

[aws-cdk-automation]

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

• CodeBuild project: AutoBuildv2Project1C6BFA3F-wQm2hXv2jqQv
• Commit ID: 7ed59b4
• Result: SUCCEEDED
• Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

[mergify]

Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork).

[github-actions]

Comments on closed issues and PRs are hard for our team to see.
If you need help, please open a new issue that references this one.