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

Remove workaround for http response tracer #2514

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 18, 2018

Conversation

harshavardhana
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Aug 17, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #2514 into master will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2514      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   10.66%   10.64%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         106      106              
  Lines       10672    10644      -28     
==========================================
- Hits         1138     1133       -5     
+ Misses       9384     9360      -24     
- Partials      150      151       +1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
cmd/client-s3-trace_v4.go 0% <0%> (ø) ⬆️
cmd/client-s3-trace_v2.go 0% <0%> (ø) ⬆️
cmd/pipechan.go 87.8% <0%> (-12.2%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update f8aafcc...31678e0. Read the comment docs.

@nitisht nitisht requested review from vadmeste, nitisht and kannappanr and removed request for vadmeste August 17, 2018 07:46
return err
}
}
respTrace, err = httputil.DumpResponse(resp, false)
Copy link
Collaborator

@kannappanr kannappanr Aug 17, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Previously we used to return on error here. Why are we not ding that now? If we don't return this code will get executed,

       dumpTLSCertificates(resp.TLS)
    }

Is that intended?

Copy link
Member Author

@harshavardhana harshavardhana Aug 18, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it really doesn't matter... we can still print TLS information.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ok

@kannappanr kannappanr merged commit 3b78c11 into minio:master Aug 18, 2018
@harshavardhana harshavardhana deleted the remove-workaround branch August 18, 2018 00:16
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