docs: add quickstart

[ethanholz]

This PR will followup from the work in #47 to move our "micro-dashboard" to a more usable walkthrough.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 99.06%. Comparing base (1ab8406) to head (cccd606).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #52   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.06%   99.06%           
=======================================
  Files           6        6           
  Lines         532      532           
=======================================
  Hits          527      527           
  Misses          5        5           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[atravitz]

this is great, but can you add some example output for the code snippets? (output of the print statements, for example)

[ethanholz]

this is great, but can you add some example output for the code snippets? (output of the print statements, for example)

@atravitz I like this idea. Should we create the example as a "complete" Python file so that we can run this independently? We can even link to it at the end as a complete example.

[atravitz]

this is great, but can you add some example output for the code snippets? (output of the print statements, for example)

@atravitz I like this idea. Should we create the example as a "complete" Python file so that we can run this independently? We can even link to it at the end as a complete example.

yeah go for it!

[atravitz]

looks great, but when I run locally I get the following error:

sqlalchemy.exc.IntegrityError: (sqlite3.IntegrityError) UNIQUE constraint failed: tasks.taskid
[SQL: INSERT INTO tasks (taskid, status, last_modified, tries, max_tries, task_type) VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?), (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?), (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)]
[parameters: ('download-data', 1, None, 0, 3, '', 'analyze-data', 0, None, 0, 3, '', 'write-report', 0, None, 0, 3, '')]
(Background on this error at: https://sqlalche.me/e/20/gkpj)

[ethanholz]

looks great, but when I run locally I get the following error:

sqlalchemy.exc.IntegrityError: (sqlite3.IntegrityError) UNIQUE constraint failed: tasks.taskid
[SQL: INSERT INTO tasks (taskid, status, last_modified, tries, max_tries, task_type) VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?), (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?), (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)]
[parameters: ('download-data', 1, None, 0, 3, '', 'analyze-data', 0, None, 0, 3, '', 'write-report', 0, None, 0, 3, '')]
(Background on this error at: https://sqlalche.me/e/20/gkpj)

This generally occurs because you run the script twice consecutively. This makes sense because task-ids are unique to inserting a duplicate ID should fail. I debated whether or not we should name task databases in the example with UUIDs because it enables us to just keep running the script over and over. The other alternative is to use an in-memory database instead of one on disk.

[atravitz]

looks great, but when I run locally I get the following error:

sqlalchemy.exc.IntegrityError: (sqlite3.IntegrityError) UNIQUE constraint failed: tasks.taskid
[SQL: INSERT INTO tasks (taskid, status, last_modified, tries, max_tries, task_type) VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?), (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?), (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)]
[parameters: ('download-data', 1, None, 0, 3, '', 'analyze-data', 0, None, 0, 3, '', 'write-report', 0, None, 0, 3, '')]
(Background on this error at: https://sqlalche.me/e/20/gkpj)

This generally occurs because you run the script twice consecutively. This makes sense because task-ids are unique to inserting a duplicate ID should fail. I debated whether or not we should name task databases in the example with UUIDs because it enables us to just keep running the script over and over. The other alternative is to use an in-memory database instead of one on disk.

ah, very possible. Is it possible to have nicer error handling for this in general? But yeah UUIDs might be good.

non-blocking though, I think this is a significant improvement!

[ethanholz]

Going to add a nicer error and then merge.