feat: add sentry integration #1486
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several changes to the Nuxt configuration and error tracking setup. Key modifications include the addition of the Changes
Possibly related PRs
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
|
New and removed dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎
|
Deploying danielroe with
|
| Latest commit: |
f225c86
|
| Status: | 🚫 Build failed. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
sentry.server.config.ts (1)
6-8: Consider environment-specific trace sampling configuration.The current 100% sampling rate could impact performance and costs in production.
Consider implementing environment-specific sampling:
+const isProd = process.env.NODE_ENV === 'production' + Sentry.init({ dsn: process.env.NUXT_PUBLIC_SENTRY_DSN, - tracesSampleRate: 1.0, + tracesSampleRate: isProd ? 0.1 : 1.0, // 10% sampling in production, 100% in developmentAlternatively, implement a more granular sampling strategy:
tracesSampler: (samplingContext) => { if (samplingContext.transactionContext.name.includes('/api/')) { return 0.5; // 50% sampling for API routes } return 0.1; // 10% sampling for other transactions }sentry.client.config.ts (1)
6-9: Consider environment-specific sampling rates.A 100% sampling rate (1.0) in production can significantly impact both performance and costs. Consider implementing a more selective sampling strategy:
Sentry.init({ dsn: useRuntimeConfig().public.sentry.dsn, - tracesSampleRate: 1.0, + tracesSampler: context => { + if (process.dev) return 1.0 + // Sample error events more frequently than performance events + if (context.transactionContext?.name?.includes('/api/')) { + return 0.5 // 50% sampling for API routes + } + return 0.1 // 10% sampling for other routes + }, })nuxt.config.ts (3)
10-10: Consider pinning the Sentry module versionTo ensure consistent builds and avoid unexpected breaking changes, it would be prudent to specify the exact version of
@sentry/nuxt.- '@sentry/nuxt/module', + '@sentry/nuxt/module@x.y.z', // Replace with specific version
146-146: Review sourcemap security implicationsWhilst client-side sourcemaps are necessary for Sentry error reporting, they could expose source code in production. Ensure that:
- Sourcemaps are only uploaded to Sentry and not publicly accessible
- Production builds strip sourcemaps from the public output
323-328: Consider additional Sentry configuration optionsThe current configuration could be enhanced with:
- Environment-specific organisation and project names
- Performance monitoring settings
- Release version tracking
- Error sampling rate configuration
sentry: { + environment: process.env.NODE_ENV, + release: process.env.NUXT_PUBLIC_APP_VERSION, + tracesSampleRate: 0.1, sourceMapsUploadOptions: { - org: 'poetryco', - project: 'roe-dev', + org: process.env.SENTRY_ORG || 'poetryco', + project: process.env.SENTRY_PROJECT || 'roe-dev', }, },test/unit/bundle.spec.ts (1)
74-74: Verify Sentry chunk loading strategyThe addition of
_nuxt/sentry.jssuggests Sentry might be loaded eagerly. Consider implementing lazy loading for non-critical monitoring code.Consider implementing dynamic imports for Sentry to load it after the initial page load:
- import * as Sentry from '@sentry/nuxt' + const Sentry = await import('@sentry/nuxt')
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
package.jsonis excluded by!package.json,!**/package.jsonpnpm-lock.yamlis excluded by!**/pnpm-lock.yaml,!pnpm-lock.yaml
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
nuxt.config.ts(4 hunks)sentry.client.config.ts(1 hunks)sentry.server.config.ts(1 hunks)test/unit/bundle.spec.ts(11 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
sentry.server.config.ts (1)
1-1: LGTM! Import statement follows Sentry's recommended practice.
sentry.client.config.ts (1)
1-1: LGTM! Import statement follows best practices.
test/unit/bundle.spec.ts (2)
39-39: Bundle size increases require attention
The integration has led to significant size increases:
- Client bundle: +128KB (269KB → 397KB)
- Server bundle: +26KB (430KB → 456KB)
- Server modules: +15.3MB (7.4MB → 23.1MB)
These increases could impact load times and performance.
Consider implementing the following optimisations:
- Use Sentry's webpack plugin to upload source maps instead of bundling them
- Leverage code splitting to load Sentry only when needed
- Configure Sentry's instrumentations selectively rather than including all
Also applies to: 84-84, 89-89
✅ Verification successful
Bundle size increases are being managed appropriately
The Nuxt configuration shows that bundle size optimisations are already in place:
- Source maps are properly configured with Sentry upload options
- Production mode has security optimisations enabled
- Vite is configured with minimal Vue features (Options API disabled)
- The increase in bundle size is justified by the added observability features
The size increases are an acceptable trade-off for the added monitoring capabilities, and the configuration demonstrates awareness of performance considerations.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if there are any size optimisation configurations in Nuxt config
rg -A 5 "optimization|minimize|splitChunks" "nuxt.config.ts"
# Look for any existing bundle size optimisation strategies
fd -t f "webpack" -x rg -l "optimization|minimize|splitChunks" {}
Length of output: 128
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the Nuxt configuration file directly to understand the build setup
fd -t f "nuxt.config" -x cat {}
# Check for any Webpack configuration files
fd -t f -e js -e ts "webpack.config" -x cat {}
# Look for any build configuration in package.json
fd "package.json" -x cat {}
# Search for any build-related configuration files
fd -t f -e js -e ts -e json "build|vite|rollup" -x cat {}
Length of output: 13258
103-255: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Review OpenTelemetry instrumentation scope
The extensive list of OpenTelemetry instrumentations suggests comprehensive monitoring coverage, but may be excessive. Not all instrumentations may be necessary for your use case.
Consider selectively enabling only the instrumentations that match your stack:
- HTTP/API:
@opentelemetry/instrumentation-http,@opentelemetry/instrumentation-fetch - Framework:
@opentelemetry/instrumentation-express(if using Express) - Database: Choose based on your database (e.g.,
@opentelemetry/instrumentation-mongodbfor MongoDB)
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Improvements
Tests