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 debug log for matched pipeline #771

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 1, 2022
Merged

add debug log for matched pipeline #771

merged 3 commits into from
Sep 1, 2022

Conversation

localvar
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Aug 31, 2022

Codecov Report

Base: 78.85% // Head: 78.83% // Decreases project coverage by -0.02% ⚠️

Coverage data is based on head (faa9325) compared to base (e8da8b0).
Patch coverage: 100.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #771      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   78.85%   78.83%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         101      101              
  Lines       11166    11168       +2     
==========================================
- Hits         8805     8804       -1     
- Misses       1857     1859       +2     
- Partials      504      505       +1     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pkg/object/httpserver/mux.go 87.64% <100.00%> (+0.05%) ⬆️
pkg/filters/proxy/pool.go 76.00% <0.00%> (-0.71%) ⬇️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

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

buildFailureResponse(ctx, http.StatusServiceUnavailable)
return
}
logger.Debugf("%s: the matched backend(Pipeline) is %s", mi.superSpec.Name(), route.path.backend)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

More info about the matched request?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

More info about the matched request?

Yes,we need client request URI,matched configured path,matched path backend

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

there could be many fields in the matched path, including headers and methods, which makes it not suitable for logging.
I think the request URI and matched backend is enough to help find the wrong rule, so I prefer not to include the matched path.

any comments?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Logging the method would be a good cost-effective addition

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

method added.

@localvar localvar merged commit 38eac8e into easegress-io:main Sep 1, 2022
@localvar localvar deleted the log-match-result branch September 1, 2022 01:57
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.

None yet

5 participants