Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(celery): ensure error.message tag does not include stacktrace [backport 2.9] #9590

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jul 19, 2024

Conversation

github-actions[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented Jun 18, 2024

Backport 16f3f95 from #9585 to 2.9.

Motivation

User reported that the celery exception traceback was being included in the error.message span tag. The error was due to us using the whole exception class, which includes the traceback, to set as the error message, instead of just the exception message. Updated test to ensure just error message is returned.

Checklist

  • Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description
  • Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR
  • Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability)
  • Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
  • Library release note guidelines are followed or label changelog/no-changelog is set
  • Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, public corp docs)
  • Backport labels are set (if applicable)
  • If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified @DataDog/apm-tees.

Reviewer Checklist

  • Title is accurate
  • All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
  • Description motivates each change
  • Avoids breaking API changes
  • Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
  • Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
  • Release note makes sense to a user of the library
  • Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
  • Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the release branch maintenance policy

)

## Motivation
User reported that the celery exception traceback was being included in
the `error.message` span tag. The error was due to us using the whole
exception class, which includes the traceback, to set as the error
message, instead of just the exception message. Updated test to ensure
just error message is returned.

## Checklist

- [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description
- [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR
- [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability)
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
- [x] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set
- [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/))
- [x] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))
- [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified
`@DataDog/apm-tees`.

## Reviewer Checklist

- [x] Title is accurate
- [x] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
- [x] Description motivates each change
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library
- [x] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications
of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)

---------

Co-authored-by: Tahir H. Butt <tahir.butt@datadoghq.com>
(cherry picked from commit 16f3f95)
@github-actions github-actions bot requested review from a team as code owners June 18, 2024 20:43
@datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn
Copy link

datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn bot commented Jun 18, 2024

Datadog Report

Branch report: backport-9585-to-2.9
Commit report: 2ae2cd1
Test service: dd-trace-py

✅ 0 Failed, 226 Passed, 50 Skipped, 19m 18.67s Total duration (1.19s time saved)

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Jun 18, 2024

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2024-07-19 13:26:23

Comparing candidate commit 4d21c45 in PR branch backport-9585-to-2.9 with baseline commit ffa42c6 in branch 2.9.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 201 metrics, 9 unstable metrics.

@gnufede gnufede closed this Jun 19, 2024
@gnufede gnufede reopened this Jun 19, 2024
@gnufede gnufede enabled auto-merge (squash) June 19, 2024 07:42
Copy link
Contributor

@sanchda sanchda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks reasonable and isolated

@datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn
Copy link

datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn bot commented Jul 19, 2024

Datadog Report

Branch report: backport-9585-to-2.9
Commit report: f0e9e10
Test service: dd-trace-py

✅ 0 Failed, 46 Passed, 230 Skipped, 2m 8.55s Total duration (17m 7.98s time saved)

@gnufede gnufede merged commit f4324bd into 2.9 Jul 19, 2024
119 of 120 checks passed
@gnufede gnufede deleted the backport-9585-to-2.9 branch July 19, 2024 18:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants