Skip to content

chore(engine): add additional logging when we fail to get snapshots since #2551

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 25, 2025
Merged

chore(engine): add additional logging when we fail to get snapshots since #2551

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 25, 2025

Conversation

ericallam
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@changeset-bot changeset-bot
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Sep 25, 2025

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 5afecc4

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

@coderabbitai coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 25, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Walkthrough

Enhanced error logging within internal-packages/run-engine/src/engine/index.ts: in the getSnapshotsSince error handler, the logged payload now includes runId and snapshotId alongside the existing context. No changes to control flow or exported/public APIs.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Description Check ⚠️ Warning There is no pull request description provided, so the required template sections such as issue linkage, checklist, testing steps, changelog summary, and screenshots are all missing, leaving reviewers without context or guidance. Please fill out the repository’s PR description template by specifying the related issue number, confirming the checklist items, describing how you tested the change, summarizing the changelog entry, and including any relevant screenshots.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title Check ✅ Passed The title succinctly describes the primary change of adding extra logging in the engine’s snapshot retrieval error path and follows the repository’s conventional commit format, making it clear and directly related to the code changes.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.
✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch ea-branch-90
📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 8863ff0 and 5afecc4.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • internal-packages/run-engine/src/engine/index.ts (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
**/*.{ts,tsx}

📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (.github/copilot-instructions.md)

**/*.{ts,tsx}: Always prefer using isomorphic code like fetch, ReadableStream, etc. instead of Node.js specific code
For TypeScript, we usually use types over interfaces
Avoid enums
No default exports, use function declarations

Files:

  • internal-packages/run-engine/src/engine/index.ts
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (23)
  • GitHub Check: units / internal / 🧪 Unit Tests: Internal (2, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / internal / 🧪 Unit Tests: Internal (5, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / internal / 🧪 Unit Tests: Internal (7, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / internal / 🧪 Unit Tests: Internal (8, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / internal / 🧪 Unit Tests: Internal (6, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / internal / 🧪 Unit Tests: Internal (4, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / internal / 🧪 Unit Tests: Internal (3, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / webapp / 🧪 Unit Tests: Webapp (8, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / webapp / 🧪 Unit Tests: Webapp (7, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / internal / 🧪 Unit Tests: Internal (1, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / webapp / 🧪 Unit Tests: Webapp (5, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / webapp / 🧪 Unit Tests: Webapp (6, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / webapp / 🧪 Unit Tests: Webapp (3, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / webapp / 🧪 Unit Tests: Webapp (4, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / webapp / 🧪 Unit Tests: Webapp (1, 8)
  • GitHub Check: units / packages / 🧪 Unit Tests: Packages (1, 1)
  • GitHub Check: units / webapp / 🧪 Unit Tests: Webapp (2, 8)
  • GitHub Check: e2e / 🧪 CLI v3 tests (ubuntu-latest - npm)
  • GitHub Check: e2e / 🧪 CLI v3 tests (windows-latest - pnpm)
  • GitHub Check: e2e / 🧪 CLI v3 tests (ubuntu-latest - pnpm)
  • GitHub Check: e2e / 🧪 CLI v3 tests (windows-latest - npm)
  • GitHub Check: typecheck / typecheck
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (javascript-typescript)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
internal-packages/run-engine/src/engine/index.ts (1)

1107-1111: More actionable logging context

Adding runId and snapshotId to the error payload will make debugging these failures much faster. Nice incremental win.

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@myftija myftija merged commit 59df4af into main Sep 25, 2025
27 of 28 checks passed
@myftija myftija deleted the ea-branch-90 branch September 25, 2025 10:59
samejr pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2025
@ericallam @samejr
chore(engine): add additional logging when we fail to get snapshots s…
5f08990 
…ince (#2551)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@myftija myftija myftija approved these changes

@nicktrn nicktrn nicktrn approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@ericallam @myftija @nicktrn