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

Added option to disable middleware spans in Starlette #3052

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

antonpirker
Copy link
Member

When middleware_spans is set to False, no spans will be recorded for Starlette middleware. (analogue to how the DjangoIntegration works)

Docs update: getsentry/sentry-docs#9934


General Notes

Thank you for contributing to sentry-python!

Please add tests to validate your changes, and lint your code using tox -e linters.

Running the test suite on your PR might require maintainer approval. Some tests (AWS Lambda) additionally require a maintainer to add a special label to run and will fail if the label is not present.

For maintainers

Sensitive test suites require maintainer review to ensure that tests do not compromise our secrets. This review must be repeated after any code revisions.

Before running sensitive test suites, please carefully check the PR. Then, apply the Trigger: tests using secrets label. The label will be removed after any code changes to enforce our policy requiring maintainers to review all code revisions before running sensitive tests.

Comment on lines 651 to 658
idx = 0
for span in transaction_event["spans"]:
if span["op"] == "middleware.starlette":
assert span["description"] == expected[idx]
assert span["tags"]["starlette.middleware_name"] == expected[idx]
if span["op"].startswith("middleware.starlette"):
assert (
span["tags"]["starlette.middleware_name"]
== expected_middleware_spans[idx]
)
idx += 1
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I guess this idx stuff was already here, but maybe we can consider changing this for loop to use zip or enumerate instead, so we can get rid of it?

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.

None yet

2 participants