Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 12, 2021. It is now read-only.

METRON-1579: Stellar should return the expression that failed in the exception #1033

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

cestella
Copy link
Member

@cestella cestella commented May 25, 2018

Contributor Comments

There are situations where we are not including the expression in the exception. Also, in stellar enrichments, we should include the relevant variable values in the exception to help with diagnosing issues.

You can try this out in the REPL as well as a stellar enrichment. Use a stellar expression which fails (e.g. num_var / 0 where num_var is an integer field).

Pull Request Checklist

Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache Metron.
Please refer to our Development Guidelines for the complete guide to follow for contributions.
Please refer also to our Build Verification Guidelines for complete smoke testing guides.

In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you follow these guidelines and ask you to double check the following:

For all changes:

  • Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? If not one needs to be created at Metron Jira.
  • Does your PR title start with METRON-XXXX where XXXX is the JIRA number you are trying to resolve? Pay particular attention to the hyphen "-" character.
  • Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target branch (typically master)?

For code changes:

  • Have you included steps to reproduce the behavior or problem that is being changed or addressed?

  • Have you included steps or a guide to how the change may be verified and tested manually?

  • Have you ensured that the full suite of tests and checks have been executed in the root metron folder via:

    mvn -q clean integration-test install && dev-utilities/build-utils/verify_licenses.sh 
    
  • Have you written or updated unit tests and or integration tests to verify your changes?

  • If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under ASF 2.0?

  • Have you verified the basic functionality of the build by building and running locally with Vagrant full-dev environment or the equivalent?

For documentation related changes:

  • Have you ensured that format looks appropriate for the output in which it is rendered by building and verifying the site-book? If not then run the following commands and the verify changes via site-book/target/site/index.html:

    cd site-book
    mvn site
    

Note:

Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check travis-ci for build issues and submit an update to your PR as soon as possible.
It is also recommended that travis-ci is set up for your personal repository such that your branches are built there before submitting a pull request.

Copy link
Contributor

@ottobackwards ottobackwards left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the contribution @cestella. Some feedback

@@ -92,6 +96,19 @@ public String getStreamSubGroup(String enrichmentType, String field) {
}
}

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this should be part of stellar itself and not part of enrichment.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I agree. I'll move that.

@@ -143,7 +143,11 @@ public T parse(final String rule, final VariableResolver variableResolver, final
try {
return clazz.cast(expression
.apply(new StellarCompiler.ExpressionState(context, functionResolver, variableResolver)));
}finally {
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe we can have stellar exception builders that provide standard, consistent exception building

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, agreed.

@cestella
Copy link
Member Author

@ottobackwards That makes sense. How do you like it now?

@cestella cestella closed this May 29, 2018
@cestella cestella reopened this May 29, 2018
@ottobackwards
Copy link
Contributor

+1
I will say, that the exception building facilities and builders should be publicly exposed as part of stellar as a follow on. As part of my own antlr work on the syslog stuff, I am kind of fond of being able to allow expansion by deriving new listeners and visitors with separate implementations, the exception builders would be nice to have with that, if you follow.

@asfgit asfgit closed this in acab943 May 31, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants