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

Add api_target to Request and data to Response Protocols #2775

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jun 7, 2023

Conversation

marandaneto
Copy link
Contributor

📜 Description

💡 Motivation and Context

Relates to getsentry/relay#2141

💚 How did you test it?

📝 Checklist

  • I reviewed the submitted code.
  • I added tests to verify the changes.
  • No new PII added or SDK only sends newly added PII if sendDefaultPII is enabled.
  • I updated the docs if needed.
  • Review from the native team if needed.
  • No breaking change or entry added to the changelog.
  • No breaking change for hybrid SDKs or communicated to hybrid SDKs.

🔮 Next steps

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jun 6, 2023

Performance metrics 🚀

  Plain With Sentry Diff
Startup time 295.75 ms 326.84 ms 31.09 ms
Size 1.72 MiB 2.28 MiB 571.64 KiB

Baseline results on branch: main

Startup times

Revision Plain With Sentry Diff
ff49977 325.84 ms 365.67 ms 39.83 ms
46b1782 387.72 ms 458.74 ms 71.02 ms
cb6c658 311.33 ms 355.09 ms 43.76 ms
1707044 338.80 ms 384.79 ms 46.00 ms
16cd2b6 243.02 ms 349.69 ms 106.67 ms

App size

Revision Plain With Sentry Diff
ff49977 1.72 MiB 2.28 MiB 571.59 KiB
46b1782 1.72 MiB 2.28 MiB 570.44 KiB
cb6c658 1.72 MiB 2.28 MiB 571.59 KiB
1707044 1.72 MiB 2.28 MiB 570.44 KiB
16cd2b6 1.72 MiB 2.28 MiB 570.95 KiB

Previous results on branch: chore/expand-graphql-protocols

Startup times

Revision Plain With Sentry Diff
6e2e00b 279.40 ms 333.79 ms 54.39 ms
387d0e3 390.00 ms 446.47 ms 56.47 ms
aaeeb0f 327.43 ms 392.18 ms 64.76 ms

App size

Revision Plain With Sentry Diff
6e2e00b 1.72 MiB 2.28 MiB 571.63 KiB
387d0e3 1.72 MiB 2.28 MiB 571.64 KiB
aaeeb0f 1.72 MiB 2.28 MiB 571.64 KiB

Copy link
Member

@adinauer adinauer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM once CI is happy

@marandaneto
Copy link
Contributor Author

LGTM once CI is happy

The failed AGP jobs are unrelated to my changes, just flakiness I guess.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 6, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 80.00% and no project coverage change.

Comparison is base (cb6c658) 81.10% compared to head (c976f83) 81.10%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main    #2775   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     81.10%   81.10%           
- Complexity     4472     4476    +4     
=========================================
  Files           347      347           
  Lines         16482    16499   +17     
  Branches       2233     2236    +3     
=========================================
+ Hits          13367    13381   +14     
- Misses         2182     2183    +1     
- Partials        933      935    +2     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...try/src/main/java/io/sentry/protocol/Response.java 79.45% <75.00%> (-0.55%) ⬇️
...ntry/src/main/java/io/sentry/protocol/Request.java 83.08% <83.33%> (+0.41%) ⬆️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@marandaneto
Copy link
Contributor Author

@romtsn

AGP Matrix Release - AGP 8.0.0 - Integrations false
AGP Matrix Release - AGP 8.0.0 - Integrations true
AGP Matrix Release - AGP 8.1.0-alpha11 - Integrations false
AGP Matrix Release - AGP 8.1.0-alpha11 - Integrations true

Are those just flaky? if so, I'd merge it as it is.

@romtsn
Copy link
Member

romtsn commented Jun 7, 2023

@romtsn

AGP Matrix Release - AGP 8.0.0 - Integrations false
AGP Matrix Release - AGP 8.0.0 - Integrations true
AGP Matrix Release - AGP 8.1.0-alpha11 - Integrations false
AGP Matrix Release - AGP 8.1.0-alpha11 - Integrations true

Are those just flaky? if so, I'd merge it as it is.

yeah emulators are flaky it seems, just merge 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.

4 participants