feat: Pretty print JSON for python. Fix missing regular expressions for masking out ephemeral information #215
Conversation
…or masking out ephemeral information
| @@ -17,7 +17,6 @@ provider: | |||
| DD_TRACE_ENABLED: true | |||
| DD_API_KEY: ${env:DD_API_KEY} | |||
| DD_TRACE_MANAGED_SERVICES: true | |||
| DD_CAPTURE_LAMBDA_PAYLOAD: true | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I inadvertently added it when I wrote the feature, but it includes all headers and payload data that is complex to mask out, so I removed it now.
I think my introduction of this is what led to the tests being in the state they're in now.
| @@ -175,14 +175,15 @@ for handler_name in "${LAMBDA_HANDLERS[@]}"; do | |||
| # Replace invocation-specific data like timestamps and IDs with XXXX to normalize logs across executions | |||
| logs=$( | |||
| echo "$raw_logs" | | |||
| node parse-json.js | | |||
|
Looks good, how were tests passing before if there were so many values that needed to be masked? |
tests/integration/serverless.yml
Outdated
| @@ -17,7 +17,6 @@ provider: | |||
| DD_TRACE_ENABLED: true | |||
| DD_API_KEY: ${env:DD_API_KEY} | |||
| DD_TRACE_MANAGED_SERVICES: true | |||
| DD_CAPTURE_LAMBDA_PAYLOAD: true | |||
| lambdaHashingVersion: 20201221 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Version 3 doesn't require us to use lambdaHashingVersion anymore. Should we remove it or update it? https://www.serverless.com/framework/docs/guides/upgrading-v3#lambda-hashing-algorithm
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will remove, thanks!
|
@nhinsch - RE: the tests issue. I don't know, I noticed 3.53 merge passed all integration tests, and so did the PR (https://github.com/DataDog/datadog-lambda-python/runs/5159541822?check_suite_focus=true#step:10:349) But I don't know how they would, since they failed on my machine when I tried to replicate... |
What does this PR do?
Motivation
Testing Guidelines
Additional Notes
Types of Changes
Check all that apply