Skip to content
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

Sentry Integration in Release Monitor #45

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

animuk
Copy link

@animuk animuk commented Feb 11, 2019

No description provided.

@animuk animuk requested a review from msrb February 11, 2019 12:14
@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #45 into master will increase coverage by 0.87%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #45      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   83.33%   84.21%   +0.87%     
==========================================
  Files           2        2              
  Lines         126      133       +7     
==========================================
+ Hits          105      112       +7     
  Misses         21       21
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
release_monitor/release_monitor.py 83.59% <100%> (+0.94%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 43abf17...f07eb8d. Read the comment docs.

@centos-ci
Copy link
Collaborator

@animuk Your image is available in the registry: docker pull MISSING_REGISTRY_NAME/MISSING_IMAGE_NAME:SNAPSHOT-PR-45

# if the "title" does not exist, catch the error and return nothing
logger.error('Titles does not exist : {e}'.format(e=str(e)))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What is the point of logging these errors here?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

And by here I mean in the whole file :)

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@msrb As I mentioned below, in case upstream format change, those logger.errors are beneficial to the developers to correct their code displayed in Sentry. If you think otherwise, we can make those into logger.info so that Sentry will not create event for that.

@msehnout
Copy link
Contributor

@animuk Handled exceptions are something that we use to control the flow of a program. They are expected to happen a therefore not worth logging into Sentry. Log only those failures which are fatal or unexpected.

@animuk
Copy link
Author

animuk commented Feb 12, 2019

@msehnout The purpose of Sentry integration is to send error events as a notification due to some internal bug or formatting error, not necessarily only fatal or unexpected error needs to be there in portal. I also understand that in release monitor few areas, handled exception is used to control the flow, may not be suitable for sentry logging.

@msehnout
Copy link
Contributor

@animuk internal bug will result in unhandled exception, thus fatal error. I am not sure what you mean by formatting error, but if you mean formatting of the code, then code with wrong indentation won't even start.

@animuk
Copy link
Author

animuk commented Feb 12, 2019

@msehnout Lets assume, the possibility, the input JSON any particular key format from the Upstream feed has been changed in future or some key has been removed. Now, in that scenario, the service will return null every time. now, this is a part of handled exception. but, developers also should be aware of that change that ingestion is not happening due to that.

@msehnout
Copy link
Contributor

@animuk fair point, it would be useful to know if the upstream format changed.

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.

5 participants