Skip to content

[APPSEC-62723] Add datadog.action_dispatch.route ENV into request#5744

Merged
Strech merged 2 commits into
masterfrom
appsec-62723-store-route-in-env
May 13, 2026
Merged

[APPSEC-62723] Add datadog.action_dispatch.route ENV into request#5744
Strech merged 2 commits into
masterfrom
appsec-62723-store-route-in-env

Conversation

@Strech

@Strech Strech commented May 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What does this PR do?

It adds functionality similar to the edge Rails to provide other products (like AppSec) access to in and saving compute costs.

Motivation:

We already accessing route specification in Tracer, but use only string representation of it. It makes sense to make it available for everyone for almost same cost.

Change log entry

None.

Additional Notes:

None.

How to test the change?

CI + ST

@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added integrations Involves tracing integrations tracing labels May 13, 2026
@datadog-prod-us1-3

datadog-prod-us1-3 Bot commented May 13, 2026 •
edited by datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2 Bot
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tests

🎉 All green!

❄️ No new flaky tests detected
🧪 All tests passed

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 92.86%
• Overall Coverage: 97.15% (-0.01%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 055ef2d | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented May 13, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-05-13 11:27:05

Comparing candidate commit 055ef2d in PR branch appsec-62723-store-route-in-env with baseline commit a848ac1 in branch master.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 45 metrics, 1 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

  • 🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
  • 🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

@Strech
Strech marked this pull request as ready for review May 13, 2026 09:08
@Strech
Strech requested review from a team as code owners May 13, 2026 09:08
@Strech
Strech requested a review from mabdinur May 13, 2026 09:08
chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]
chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed May 13, 2026
View reviewed changes

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 0498499724

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread lib/datadog/tracing/contrib/action_pack/action_dispatch/instrumentation.rb
@Strech
Strech requested a review from y9v May 13, 2026 10:13
wantsui
wantsui approved these changes May 13, 2026
View reviewed changes

@wantsui wantsui left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

@Strech
Strech merged commit 2490e6e into master May 13, 2026
584 checks passed
@Strech
Strech deleted the appsec-62723-store-route-in-env branch May 13, 2026 15:07
@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added this to the 2.34.0 milestone May 13, 2026
@Strech Strech mentioned this pull request May 28, 2026
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector[bot] chatgpt-codex-connector[bot] left review comments
@y9v y9v y9v approved these changes
@wantsui wantsui wantsui approved these changes
@p-datadog p-datadog p-datadog approved these changes
@mabdinur mabdinur Awaiting requested review from mabdinur mabdinur is a code owner automatically assigned from DataDog/apm-sdk-capabilities-ruby

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

integrations Involves tracing integrations tracing

Projects

None yet

Milestone

2.34.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@Strech @y9v @wantsui @p-datadog