Skip to content

[SCB-2387] optimize abnormal print information of SwaggerProducerOper…#2722

Closed
david6969xin wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:1.3.xfrom
david6969xin:branch_1.3.x_2387
Closed

[SCB-2387] optimize abnormal print information of SwaggerProducerOper…#2722
david6969xin wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:1.3.xfrom
david6969xin:branch_1.3.x_2387

Conversation

@david6969xin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

…ation

Follow this checklist to help us incorporate your contribution quickly and easily:

  • Make sure there is a JIRA issue filed for the change (usually before you start working on it). Trivial changes like typos do not require a JIRA issue. Your pull request should address just this issue, without pulling in other changes.
  • Each commit in the pull request should have a meaningful subject line and body.
  • Format the pull request title like [SCB-XXX] Fixes bug in ApproximateQuantiles, where you replace SCB-XXX with the appropriate JIRA issue.
  • Write a pull request description that is detailed enough to understand what the pull request does, how, and why.
  • Run mvn clean install -Pit to make sure basic checks pass. A more thorough check will be performed on your pull request automatically.
  • If this contribution is large, please file an Apache Individual Contributor License Agreement.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov-commenter commented Feb 18, 2022

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 83.00%. Comparing base (ad53a38) to head (8f5a659).
⚠️ Report is 13 commits behind head on 1.3.x.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              1.3.x    #2722   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     82.99%   83.00%           
  Complexity      746      746           
=========================================
  Files          1233     1233           
  Lines         33082    33082           
  Branches       3001     3001           
=========================================
+ Hits          27458    27461    +3     
+ Misses         4438     4437    -1     
+ Partials       1186     1184    -2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

if (shouldPrintErrorLog(e)) {
LOGGER.error("unexpected error operation={}, message={}",
invocation.getInvocationQualifiedName(), ExceptionUtils.getExceptionMessageWithoutTrace(e));
invocation.getInvocationQualifiedName(), e.getMessage());
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why modify this ? There is no SCB-2387 for this.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not all of the sensitive contents can be blocked by this way. For example, the Jackson may put raw JSON string into exception message.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Personally I'd prefer not modify this. This is not an actual serious information leak problem. And if the user's do need fix it, they can add try-catch block to avoid throw JsonParseException.

This information is quite useful for problem analysis and have modified many times.

@liubao68
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

liubao68 commented Mar 4, 2022

不处理

@liubao68 liubao68 closed this Mar 4, 2022
@david6969xin david6969xin deleted the branch_1.3.x_2387 branch March 30, 2022 11:46
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.

4 participants