-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 139
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
Sniffer
Improvements
#1258
Sniffer
Improvements
#1258
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1258 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 19.30% 19.30%
=======================================
Files 164 164
Lines 10849 10849
=======================================
Hits 2094 2094
Misses 8755 8755
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚨 Try these New Features:
|
Bencher Report
Click to view all benchmark results
|
Bencher Report
Click to view all benchmark results
|
Bencher Report
Click to view all benchmark results
|
from description of #1253:
I don't see this being implemented here. Is that the reason why this PR says it only partially solves #1253? will that be done in a follow up PR? other than that, LGTM |
Indeed, will be pushed in a different pr |
..This should make it easier to debug multiple sniffers by printing the sniffer identifier if a problem occurs during the `drop` function.
..If this flag is set to true, the `Sniffer` **will** validate that all the downstrea and upstream messages were handled before dropping, otherwise they are ignored.
e4abf67
to
27eec57
Compare
Partially resolves #1253