ref: Give http transactions better names #687
Conversation
|
@Swatinem where was the original transaction name assigned, is that done by an integration? |
|
Yes, the tower-http layer does that. It only has access to the URL, not the matcher itself. |
Thanks, that's interesting. We're seeing similar issues in our React integration, so maybe this will require a broader solution after all in the long-term. cc @jjbayer @Swatinem In the interim, it would be valuable to document this workaround. Effectively everyone using the tower integration has to check and work around this to get proper transactions. |
| @@ -299,7 +299,6 @@ impl CfiCacheActor { | |||
| #[tracing::instrument(skip_all)] | |||
| fn write_cficache(path: &Path, object_handle: &ObjectHandle) -> Result<(), CfiCacheError> { | |||
| configure_scope(|scope| { | |||
| scope.set_transaction(Some("compute_cficache")); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in theory it seems to me this should have been some kind of nested transaction inside the main request one? does the product handle nested transactions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Absolutely. We only use them for lazy recomputations though, normal cache computation is a span instead, as per the instrument above.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so i'm curious then why you decided to remove these transactions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
because they would overwrite the symbolicate_stacktraces name.
This solves the problem of having a ton of unique
GET /requests/UUIDperformance monitoring transactions.Also updates the Sentry SDK for newly introduced API.
#skip-changelog