Skip to content

Conversation

@michellewzhang
Copy link
Member

@michellewzhang michellewzhang commented Nov 14, 2025

fixeds SENTRY-5CYF

if replay start or replay end are missing, pass None instead of a empty string

@michellewzhang michellewzhang requested a review from a team as a code owner November 14, 2025 18:34
@github-actions github-actions bot added the Scope: Backend Automatically applied to PRs that change backend components label Nov 14, 2025
Copy link
Member

@aliu39 aliu39 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lets pass None when missing, seer accepts none now

could also leave it as is and keep observing when this happens, we're selecting all fields in query_replay_instance so I'd expect these to always be valid

@michellewzhang
Copy link
Member Author

lets pass None when missing, seer accepts none now

could also leave it as is and keep observing when this happens, we're selecting all fields in query_replay_instance so I'd expect these to always be valid

pass None as the replay_start/replay_end value?

@aliu39
Copy link
Member

aliu39 commented Nov 14, 2025

can we add a warning log for when either is none, it really shouldn't happen for the snuba query

Comment on lines -206 to -207
"replay_start": replay_start.isoformat(),
"replay_end": replay_end.isoformat(),
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

confused why we were converting from iso and then to iso here, do we need this? .get() should default to None if it doesn't find anything

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

doing fromiso first to validate the format.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ok added back validation

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 14, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...sentry/replays/endpoints/project_replay_summary.py 66.66% 4 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #103388      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   80.64%    80.67%   +0.03%     
===========================================
  Files        9237      9237              
  Lines      394659    394658       -1     
  Branches    25146     25146              
===========================================
+ Hits       318280    318407     +127     
+ Misses      75932     75804     -128     
  Partials      447       447              

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Scope: Backend Automatically applied to PRs that change backend components

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants