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

Initial filtering prototype #12

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

CamJN
Copy link

@CamJN CamJN commented May 25, 2015

I find that the lowest frames of the stack trace can often be in the way, and prevent otherwise adjacent frames from being combined. This is what I've been doing to throw out the rack and passenger frames, and is by no means merge-worthy but I find it's a good spot to throw out unwanted data and figured I'd share. Maybe you'll have an idea how to make this usable in a general sense.

The attached screenshots show the difference that even this crude version can make.

screen shot 2015-05-25 at 3 23 21 pm
screen shot 2015-05-25 at 3 21 19 pm

@SamSaffron
Copy link
Owner

I am totally open to something like this but can we make it optional, you can even remember the option in local storage or something

just add a checkbox for it.

@CamJN
Copy link
Author

CamJN commented May 27, 2015

Of course, it should be optional. I'm not sure how to access request params in the renderer, though. Any advice?

@CamJN
Copy link
Author

CamJN commented May 27, 2015

In the meantime, added the missing sorting to make this a flame graph vs a flame chart. See: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1123495

result:
screen shot 2015-05-27 at 1 03 03 pm

@SamSaffron
Copy link
Owner

can't you just do all of this in the UI side, server payload can remain.

so default would be as it is now, then if you tick a box it kicks it into
the other mode and rerenders (remembering the box is ticked using local
storage)

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:47 AM, Camden Narzt notifications@github.com
wrote:

Of course, it should be optional. I'm not sure how to access request
params in the renderer, though. Any advice?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#12 (comment).

@CamJN
Copy link
Author

CamJN commented May 27, 2015

Then I'd have to reindex everything, but I suppose it could be done.

@CamJN
Copy link
Author

CamJN commented May 28, 2015

Well, I tried; couldn't get the indexing to work client side. Either way you get the sorting corrected.

sort stacks alphabetically, not by time
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.

None yet

2 participants