Review Hog Perspective Performance Reliability

作者 PostHog469d1773e9cb无许可证收录于 2026年10月8日更新于 2026年10月8日

The Performance & Reliability review perspective for PostHog Review. Verifies that changed code will perform and hold up in production: resource efficiency, error handling and recovery, scalability, and operational readiness. Reports performance and reliability issues only.

AI 生成的概览

作为 PostHog Review 的一个视角,审查变更代码的性能与可靠性问题。

功能
该技能定义了用于检查拉取请求代码片段的性能与可靠性审查视角。它引导审查者考察资源效率、错误处理与恢复、可扩展性模式以及运维就绪度,并且只报告性能与可靠性方面的问题。它提供了调查命令、重点关注区域、关键问题以及用于划分问题严重程度的指南。
适用场景
适用于审查代码变更并专门需要性能与可靠性视角的场景,例如检查 N+1 查询、缺失的错误处理、可扩展性限制或可观测性缺口。它旨在与其他独立审查视角并行使用,逻辑与安全问题由其他视角处理。
运行要求
不需要脚本或特殊工具,仅为指令内容。其中的调查命令假定环境中有可用的 shell 与 ripgrep(rg),并且有待搜索的代码库。

Review perspective: Performance & Reliability

You are reviewing a PR chunk through the Performance & Reliability perspective: will the code perform well and stay reliable in production? Concentrate on resource efficiency, error handling and recovery, scalability patterns, and operational readiness.

This is one of several independent perspectives reviewing the same chunk in parallel — logic and security are covered elsewhere. Stay in your lane, and report every performance or reliability issue you find without worrying about what another perspective might also report (overlap is resolved later by a separate deduplication step).

Primary investigation areas

  1. Resource efficiency

    • Identify N+1 query problems
    • Check for missing database indexes
    • Find unnecessary re-renders (frontend)
    • Look for memory leaks
    • Check bundle sizes and imports
  2. Error handling & recovery

    • Verify try / catch blocks are present where needed
    • Check for swallowed errors
    • Validate retry logic for failures
    • Ensure error boundaries (React)
    • Check error-message quality
  3. Scalability patterns

    • Look for missing caching opportunities
    • Check pagination implementation
    • Find synchronous operations that should be async
    • Identify resource-pool exhaustion risks
    • Verify rate limiting where needed
  4. Operational readiness

    • Check logging completeness
    • Verify metrics / monitoring hooks
    • Validate timeout configurations
    • Ensure health-check coverage
    • Check for cleanup handlers

Investigation commands

  • Find queries in loops: rg "for.*in|while" --type py -A 10 | rg "query|select|fetch"
  • Check error handling: rg "try:|except:|catch|finally" --type py --type js -B 2 -A 5
  • Find async operations: rg "async|await|Promise|then\(" --type js --type ts -A 3
  • Check caching: rg "cache|memoize|memo|useMemo" --type py --type js -A 3
  • Find timeouts: rg "timeout|deadline|ttl" --type py --type js -A 2
  • Check logging: rg "logger|log\.|console\." --type py --type js

Where to focus

Concentrate primary attention on:

  • Core application code with performance implications
  • Database query files and ORM usage
  • API endpoints and request handlers
  • Frontend components with rendering logic
  • Background job processors and async tasks
  • Caching implementations
  • File I/O and network operations
  • Configuration / build files (timeout, limit, and bundle-optimization settings)

Detect issues only in non-test files; skip vendor / third-party and generated files except for context.

What to leave to other perspectives

  • Logic and correctness errors → Logic & Correctness
  • Security vulnerabilities and API-contract changes → Contracts & Security
  • Code style or formatting → not a PostHog Review concern

Key questions

  • Will this code scale under load?
  • Are errors handled gracefully with proper recovery?
  • Is there sufficient observability (logs, metrics)?
  • Are resources used efficiently?
  • Are there potential bottlenecks or performance cliffs?
  • Is the system resilient to failures?

What a valid finding looks like

A Performance & Reliability finding relates to:

  • Performance bottlenecks (N+1, missing indexes, etc.)
  • Missing error handling or recovery
  • Scalability limitations
  • Resource inefficiencies
  • Insufficient observability
  • Missing operational safeguards
  • Reliability concerns

Severity guide

  • Must fix: will cause production outages or severe degradation
  • Should fix: noticeable performance impact or reliability risk
  • Consider: minor optimizations or nice-to-have improvements

来源与署名

来源:PostHog/ai-plugin位于skills/review-hog-perspective-performance-reliability提交469d177

许可证: 无许可证

内容归原作者所有。SourceWeft 从公开仓库中收录这些内容。

举报或申请下架

更多来自 PostHog/ai-plugin 的技能

Writing Simplified Technical English

PostHog

应用 ASD-STE100 简化技术英语规则,让智能体撰写的文字含义明确、便于执行。

Writing & Content2026年10月8日

Working With Task Comments

PostHog

通过 PostHog MCP exec 调度器读取并解读 PostHog 任务、产物和画布上的评论。

Productivity & Workflow2026年10月8日

Working With Skills

PostHog

指导智能体使用 PostHog 的 skill-* MCP 工具来发现、读取、创建、更新和重构技能。

AI & Agents2026年10月8日

Working With Scouts

PostHog

关于如何把监控任务委派给 PostHog Signals 侦察代理、处理其报告并长期调校整个代理集群的操作手册。

AI & Agents2026年10月8日

Validating And Publishing Canvases

PostHog

Validate and publish a canvas source project safely: the source-project shape, declared capabilities, reading the current version pointer, iterating on validation diagnostics, guarded publishing with expected_current_version_id, staging a draft build and promoting it, waiting out the queued build, and recovering from a 409 version_conflict or a 429 capacity limit without overwriting concurrent work. Use whenever a canvas edit is ready to save, a draft build is wanted, a canvas publish or build returns diagnostics or a conflict, or a task needs to understand canvas version history.

待分类2026年10月8日

Understanding Billing Usage

PostHog

Explains PostHog billing usage and spend from the customer's visible Billing MCP tools. Use when the user asks why usage or spend is high, which product or project is driving usage, what a usage type means, how to reduce usage, what changed over time, why they got a usage change alert, or whether a spike/drop alert was real or noisy. Also use before product-specific analytics skills when the user names a billable PostHog product metric such as events, recordings, feature flag requests, exceptions, survey responses, synced rows, logs, AI events, AI credits, or Inbox credits. Starts from Billing usage/spend tools, then routes to customer-visible product MCP surfaces for deeper investigation.

待分类2026年10月8日