Skip to content

Conversation

@iambriccardo
Copy link
Contributor

@iambriccardo iambriccardo commented Oct 14, 2025

This PR reduces the sample rate for specific endpoints that are pinged often in ETL.

@iambriccardo
Copy link
Contributor Author

@codex review

@iambriccardo iambriccardo changed the title feat(sentry): Reduce sample rate feat(sentry): Reduce sample rate for specific endpoints Oct 14, 2025
@iambriccardo iambriccardo marked this pull request as ready for review October 14, 2025 19:12
@iambriccardo iambriccardo requested a review from a team as a code owner October 14, 2025 19:12
Copy link

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting

Comment on lines +82 to +83
traces_sampler: Some(Arc::new(|ctx: &sentry::TransactionContext| {
let transaction_name = ctx.name();

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P0 Badge Provide SamplingContext and f32 in traces sampler

ClientOptions::traces_sampler expects a callback of type Fn(&SamplingContext) -> f32, but the added closure is declared as |ctx: &sentry::TransactionContext| and returns 0.001/0.01 literals that default to f64. The mismatch in both the argument and return types prevents the crate from compiling. The sampler should accept &SamplingContext and return f32 values.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Oct 14, 2025

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 18507385068

Details

  • 0 of 14 (0.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.06%) to 82.285%

Changes Missing Coverage Covered Lines Changed/Added Lines %
etl-api/src/main.rs 0 14 0.0%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 18503954650: -0.06%
Covered Lines: 15068
Relevant Lines: 18312

💛 - Coveralls

1 similar comment
@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 18507385068

Details

  • 0 of 14 (0.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.06%) to 82.285%

Changes Missing Coverage Covered Lines Changed/Added Lines %
etl-api/src/main.rs 0 14 0.0%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 18503954650: -0.06%
Covered Lines: 15068
Relevant Lines: 18312

💛 - Coveralls

@imor
Copy link
Contributor

imor commented Oct 15, 2025

@iambriccardo nice that you were looking at this. Once thing that was weird was that the ELB health checker was not hitting the /healtch_check endpoint. I saw a lot of GET <none> calls in sentry:

image

Maybe the health checker is not configured correctly.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Ehm, this is likely a problem of the transaction parsing. Will take a look next week!

@iambriccardo
Copy link
Contributor Author

@iambriccardo nice that you were looking at this. Once thing that was weird was that the ELB health checker was not hitting the /healtch_check endpoint. I saw a lot of GET <none> calls in sentry:

image Maybe the health checker is not configured correctly.

I did a more in depth analysis and it seems to be working fine (also no more of these transactions are coming in). I would merge this PR and then monitor the situation.

Copy link
Contributor

@imor imor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay, let's merge it.

@imor imor merged commit d74d9d0 into main Oct 20, 2025
9 checks passed
@imor imor deleted the riccardobusetti/etl-336-sample-verbose-endpoints-at-a-smaller-rate branch October 20, 2025 10:28
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