fix(grouping): Add default value for fingerprint rule text #81076
Conversation
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
github-actions
bot
added
the
Scope: Backend
jangjodi
reviewed
Nov 20, 2024
jangjodi
approved these changes
Nov 20, 2024
lobsterkatie
force-pushed
the
kmclb-add-default-value-for-fingerprint-rule-text
branch
from
f1abb62 to
d8ec996
Compare
lobsterkatie
deleted the
kmclb-add-default-value-for-fingerprint-rule-text
branch
harshithadurai
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 25, 2024
In #80935, we switched from calculating fingerprinting rule text in the `expose_fingerprint_dict` helper to reading it from the fingerprint info, since as of #79231 we store it there. This works fine for new events, but this code also runs when someone opens the grouping info section of the issue details page, and if they do that on an event from before we started storing the rule text, it results in a key error. This fixes that by partially undoing the change made in #80935 - it doesn't switch back to always re-calculating the the rule text, but does fall back to doing so when it's not found in the stored data.
evanh
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 25, 2024
In #80935, we switched from calculating fingerprinting rule text in the `expose_fingerprint_dict` helper to reading it from the fingerprint info, since as of #79231 we store it there. This works fine for new events, but this code also runs when someone opens the grouping info section of the issue details page, and if they do that on an event from before we started storing the rule text, it results in a key error. This fixes that by partially undoing the change made in #80935 - it doesn't switch back to always re-calculating the the rule text, but does fall back to doing so when it's not found in the stored data.
andrewshie-sentry
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 2, 2024
In #80935, we switched from calculating fingerprinting rule text in the `expose_fingerprint_dict` helper to reading it from the fingerprint info, since as of #79231 we store it there. This works fine for new events, but this code also runs when someone opens the grouping info section of the issue details page, and if they do that on an event from before we started storing the rule text, it results in a key error. This fixes that by partially undoing the change made in #80935 - it doesn't switch back to always re-calculating the the rule text, but does fall back to doing so when it's not found in the stored data.
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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.
In #80935, we switched from calculating fingerprinting rule text in the
expose_fingerprint_dicthelper to reading it from the fingerprint info, since as of #79231 we store it there. This works fine for new events, but this code also runs when someone opens the grouping info section of the issue details page, and if they do that on an event from before we started storing the rule text, it results in a key error.This fixes that by partially undoing the change made in #80935 - it doesn't switch back to always re-calculating the the rule text, but does fall back to doing so when it's not found in the stored data.