-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 138
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
CBG-4187: Add stat to track number of assertion failures #7127
Open
bbrks
wants to merge
1
commit into
main
Choose a base branch
from
CBG-4187
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we say what an assertion failure is? Something like:
Assertions count is already included in the warning stat and mark problems that are not caused by users and are a software precondition.
This message isn't good, and but for these failures there's no meaningful action a user could take. That's the difference I see between these and other warnings, which could be things that a user could act upon.
Calling
AssertfCtx
will callWarnfCtx
directly and this value already increments the WarnCount metric. We also have no way to determine that a message was an assertion failure vs a standard warning from a log file.I don't know how useful this stat is without being easily able to ID which are assertion failures from the log files without doing a search for the messages.
I don't know if it makes sense to just add a prefix like "[WRN] Assertion Error: msg" or change
AssertfCtx
->WarnfCtx
->logTo
to put a new log level? I don't think that a log level change is right because I think that will break the loose log compatibility we have.Finally, does it actually make sense to log these as errors?
I'm not opposed to the stat, I just want to have it be clear from the description how dev, support, end users are intended to use it. Should this be specially flagged from nutshell, etc as something that needs immediate dev attention? Do we expect a special alerting from capella?