fix: updates ValueRecorder to allow negative values #1373
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1373 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 93.99% 94.09% +0.09%
==========================================
Files 153 153
Lines 4666 4656 -10
Branches 963 959 -4
==========================================
- Hits 4386 4381 -5
+ Misses 280 275 -5
|
| correlationContext?: api.CorrelationContext, | ||
| spanContext?: api.SpanContext | ||
| ): void { | ||
| if (this._absolute && value < 0) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the critical crux of the change.
| record(value: number, correlationContext: CorrelationContext): void; | ||
| record( | ||
| value: number, | ||
| correlationContext: CorrelationContext, | ||
| spanContext: SpanContext | ||
| ): void; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These signatures appeared completely unused. When get to the BoundValueRecorder they were just ignored, so I removed them. Have an open question in Gitter but figured I'd start with removing and can always add back if necessary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe these signatures came from the spec, but the spec on what to do with the correlations/span context was never finished.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, interesting. Feels like these should be left out until that is known but obviously I am new to the project and may not understand all the impacts.
I couldn't find any current usages. May be some usages in the wild outside of these repos (js/contrib) but we are also < 1.0 so figured was OK to have a breaking change to clean-up at this point.
| * (Measure only, default true) Asserts that this metric will only accept | ||
| * non-negative values (e.g. disk usage). | ||
| */ | ||
| absolute?: boolean; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ValueRecorder was the only thing using absolute that I could find. Via #1241 it seems like that should not be configurable. As such, seemed natural to rip out while in here.
| const boundValueRecorder = valueRecorder.bind(labels); | ||
| boundValueRecorder.record(-10); | ||
| boundValueRecorder.record(10); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This diff makes things confusing but that test case was not touched, its just a shifting of code.
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it( | ||
| 'should accept negative (and positive) values when absolute is set' + |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test case was modified to not pass any value for 'absolute' and then use existing assertions to assert both positive and negative values are accepted.
michaelgoin
requested review from
dyladan,
legendecas,
markwolff,
mayurkale22,
mwear,
naseemkullah,
obecny,
OlivierAlbertini and
vmarchaud
as code owners
|
I think codecov is mad at me for deleting too much covered code? 🤷 |
|
Haha actually it's mad because only 75% of lines you added are tested. Since you mostly deleted and only added a very small number of lines, it is saying you only tested 75% of the diff, even though you increased total project coverage by 0.07%. |
|
I believe the only actual new non-test code I added was appropriately referencing the Also, the related issue is flagged as required for GA so not sure if you want to flag this PR or not for the project board but figured I'd mention. |
|
@dyladan merged in master. think this has the necessary approvals now (2 maintainers, 3 total reviewers) |
Which problem is this PR solving?
Short description of the changes
absoluteconfiguration since no-longer has a valid userecord(..., correlationContext, spanContext)signature(s)