-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
Mobile transaction type #184
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
aaff941
Add test for mobile transaction enrichment
LikeTheSalad 9997412
Add mobile transaction type for mobile transactions
LikeTheSalad 4ad98bb
Updating tests
LikeTheSalad efbb074
Do not set transaction type based on span type for mobile spans
LikeTheSalad 802ccb3
Using provided type as transaction.type
LikeTheSalad f65cbd1
Update enrichments/trace/internal/elastic/span.go
LikeTheSalad f78e4f7
Update enrichments/trace/internal/elastic/span.go
LikeTheSalad 065e126
Cleaning up
LikeTheSalad 60b5dd7
Updating tests
LikeTheSalad ca78176
Clean up
LikeTheSalad File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How will this attribute be set?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's set by the EDOT mobile SDKs specified here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe also add
elasticattr.TransactionTypedo this case so that iftransaction.typeis set already, it's not overridden?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm ok with validating that
transaction.typewon't change if it's already present. It's a different use case though it seems like it'd be easy enough to add it in this PR. What do you think, @gregkalapos @lahsivjar ?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think overriding behaviour should be handled for other attributes too, but I am not sure if not overriding in all cases would be the correct option. I have created #185 to discuss it further.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok by me to include it in this PR.update: @lahsivjar was faster - let's discuss in #185.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Got it. Thanks, @lahsivjar. I won't add that change here then.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should do it in a separate PR since this concern might apply to other attributes too, but I don't have a strong opinion here. Does that makes sense @gregkalapos @felixbarny ? Or do we think onlytransaction.typeneeds to be handled this way?NVM, let's discuss in #185