RUM-7549 Handle trace with coroutines#2457
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #2457 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 70.10% 70.03% -0.08%
===========================================
Files 770 770
Lines 28535 28569 +34
Branches 4781 4780 -1
===========================================
+ Hits 20004 20006 +2
- Misses 7185 7227 +42
+ Partials 1346 1336 -10
|
0xnm
left a comment
0xnm
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see that these changes only for OpenTracing, should we do something similar for OpenTelemetry.
Anyway, lgtm.
| internalLogger.log( | ||
| InternalLogger.Level.ERROR, | ||
| InternalLogger.Target.USER, | ||
| () -> "Span " + span.getOperationName() + " not registered because of traceId mismatch; " + |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is it useful here also to log the value of span.context().getTraceId()?
| internalLogger.log( | ||
| InternalLogger.Level.ERROR, | ||
| InternalLogger.Target.USER, | ||
| () -> "Span " + span.getOperationName() + " not expired because of traceId mismatch; " + |
| public void registerSpan(final DDSpan span) { | ||
| if (traceId == null || span.context() == null) { | ||
| internalLogger.log( | ||
| InternalLogger.Level.ERROR, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In DDSpan when we are dropping the span warn level is used, but here it is an error in the whole file. Should they be aligned?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In DDSpan, we use Warning as the cause of the drop is (most likely) misuse of the SDK, usually by calling finish() more than once.
Here the drop reason are ones that should not happen™️, hence the use of Error level.
3 participants
What does this PR do?
The main focus is to avoid sharing the same list of scopes across tracers, and add some internal logs to better diagnose issues with tracing.