feat(nuxt): Improve serverless event flushing and scope isolation #14605
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Lms24
approved these changes
Dec 6, 2024
size-limit report 📦
|
andreiborza
reviewed
Dec 6, 2024
|
|
||
| async function flushWithTimeout(): Promise<void> { | ||
| const sentryClient = getClient(); | ||
| const isDebug = sentryClient ? sentryClient.getOptions().debug : false; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
q: why aren't we using DEBUG_BUILD here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because this is in the runtime folder of the Nuxt module and it's not possible to use it there because it's a different build context :(
mydea
reviewed
Dec 6, 2024
| // In environments where we cannot make use of OTel httpInstrumentation, e.g. when just importing the Sentry server config at | ||
| // the top level instead of `--import` or dynamic import like on Vercel, we still need to ensure requests are properly isolated | ||
| const isolationScope = getIsolationScope(); | ||
| const newIsolationScope = isolationScope === getDefaultIsolationScope() ? isolationScope.clone() : isolationScope; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe let's add a comment here that describes what/why we are doing here:
If otel instrumentation works, this will already be isolated at this point by the SentryHttpInstrumentation. We can identify this by comparing the current isolation scope to the default one. If that is the case, all good, we do not need to do anything. else, we fork the isolation scope here :)
mydea
reviewed
Dec 6, 2024
| const isolationScope = getIsolationScope(); | ||
| const newIsolationScope = isolationScope === getDefaultIsolationScope() ? isolationScope.clone() : isolationScope; | ||
|
|
||
| consoleSandbox(() => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
no strong feelings, but do we need to always log this, or is logger.log not enough here? 🤔
s1gr1d
changed the title
s1gr1d
changed the title
s1gr1d
force-pushed
the
sig/serverless-handling
branch
from
e77d345 to
790f765
Compare
andreiborza
approved these changes
Dec 6, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Adds serverless (e.g. Vercel, Netlify) improvements:
waitUntilfor waiting on Sentry events to send before shutting down the function