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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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 a filter for faults to avoid bucketing #10921
Add a filter for faults to avoid bucketing #10921
Changes from 8 commits
7d3c5b9
9ab93ee
8bc1f54
1676a54
43b885d
275cbfd
3ac3268
9d98bc7
1f4b057
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
I think we're going to have a half dozen of these where we want to report the caller; is there a unittest to write to make sure we are detecting/rewriting info as we expect?
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.
Unfortunately I didn't see a way to check the properties being set here. @pieandcakes do you know?
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.
I'll ask a different way. Are there reasonable unittests for GetModifiedFaultParameters to prove it extracts the stack top OR the correct depth within it, and when we add 'more' examples of frames to skip, we keep the same behavior?
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.
That I can add, but if we can find a way to assert the fault behavior I would prefer that. If not testing
GetModifiedFaultParameters
is still a good test.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.
We don't process the bucket parameters until PostEvent is called and then it processes them and adds them to the properties. I don't think you'd have a way to validate that the values are correct/not correct .
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.
Got it. Should the
Module
be something likeMicrosoft.VisualStudio.LanguageServices.Razor.Test.dll
or should it be the containing type full name?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.
It should be FileNameNoExtensions. The code that does it today is here:
https://devdiv.visualstudio.com/DevDiv/_git/VSTelemetryAPI?path=/src/Microsoft.VisualStudio.Telemetry/WindowsErrorReporting/WatsonReportExceptionProcessing.cs&version=GBmain&line=463&lineEnd=464&lineStartColumn=1&lineEndColumn=1&lineStyle=plain&_a=contents