HTTP integration not adding breadcrumbs

[bartversluijs]

• Review the documentation: https://docs.sentry.io/
• Search for existing issues: https://github.com/getsentry/sentry-javascript/issues
• Use the latest release: https://github.com/getsentry/sentry-javascript/releases

Package + Version

• @sentry/browser
• @sentry/node
• raven-js
• raven-node (raven for node)
• other:

Version:

5.0.8

Description

Hi,

I'm not sure if I'm using this the right way, but I couldn't find any documentation that addresses what I want to do. I'm using Sentry in a NodeJS process, and while it uses ExpressJS, it also does execute some functions without ExpressJS, so in the backend. I want to check these processes for errors, but in a new "scope". So, at the start of executing of a function until it's executed, it's a new scope.

For example:

Sentry.withScope(scope => {
  scope.setLevel('error');
  scope.clear();
  scope.clearBreadcrumbs();

  executeAPromisedFunction(parameters).then(response => {

    Sentry.addBreadcrumb({
      message: 'Promised function executed',
      level: "info"
    });

    anotherPromisedFunction(parameters).then(response => {

      // Finished execution, nothing to see here!

    }).catch(err => {
      // An error occured here! Sent this to Sentry!
      Sentry.captureException(err);
    })

  }).catch(err => {
    // An error occured! So sent this to Sentry!
    Sentry.captureException(err);
  })
});

What I believe should happen
New issue created on error, with a breadcrumb if first function executed fine but second is not. Or don't send a issue when everything went fine. But don't add any breadcrumbs from other functions, like console.log etc.

What actually happens
An issue is send to Sentry with all breadcrumbs, like console.logs, which I don't need. I just want a scope that only contains information about this execution. I don't want any info about other executed files or console.log breadcrumbs.

Is this possible? And is this a bug or is it supposed to do this?

[kamilogorek]

Is this possible? And is this a bug or is it supposed to do this?

Yes, but you need to create your own Hub for it, because you are doing asynchronous things.

withScope is just a shortcut for pushScope => callback => popScope. When you are doing promises, nothing stops your code from popping the scope from the stack that's not "yours", thus it can get out of sync.

Scopes are also inherited from the parent, and "global client" is using top-most scope and thats why you have all the data in there.

See 2nd example of using direct Hubs - https://docs.sentry.io/platforms/javascript/advance-settings/#using-a-client-directly
This way, you have a full control over what data you keep/inherit and pass around.

Also take a look at https://docs.sentry.io/enriching-error-data/scopes/?platform=browser to see how it all works together.

[bartversluijs]

Hi @kamilogorek,

Thanks for this! I really couldn't find the right way how to implement this, because it's mostly focused on ExpressJS.

However, with creating a new Hub, it doesn't automatically add some breadcrumbs like HTTP(S) requests made from within NodeJS (so not the ExpressJS request to the NodeJS server), is that right & expected behavior?

[kamilogorek]

Yes, we mention this in the latter section of the same page :)

https://docs.sentry.io/platforms/javascript/advance-settings/#dealing-with-integrations

[bartversluijs]

Hi @kamilogorek,

Thanks for the information. I saw that and tried is. But it doesn't add the request breadcrumbs to that hub...

This is a simple example of how it's step up:

const Sentry = require("@sentry/node");
const hub = new Sentry.Hub(Sentry.getCurrentHub().getClient());

hub.run(currentHub => {

  promiseWithARequest(parameters).then(response => {

    currentHub.addBreadcrumb({
      message: 'Request was fine, breadcrumb of request has to be added in the promiseWithARequest function like it does with a global Sentry hub',
      level: "info"
    });

    anotherPromisedFunction(parameters).then(response => {
      // Finished execution, nothing to see here!
    }).catch(err => {
      // An error occured here! Sent this to Sentry!
      currentHub.captureException(err);
    })

  }).catch(err => {
    // An error occured! So sent this to Sentry!
    currentHub.captureException(err);
  })
});

I thought this was enough for the request function to "know" which scope he has to add a breadcrumb to. But the breadcrumb is not added. Before creating a new Hub, this was added to the breadcrumbs, because I was using the global Sentry hub. Am I doing something wrong or is it impossible to do what I want?

Thanks for the help!

[bartversluijs]

I think it's a similar question as #1764, but the only solution is setting the new Hub as the global Hub, but then conflicts can happen between the hubs afaik.

Side note
I've added a standard breadcrumb in my promiseWithARequest function via Sentry.addBreadcrumb (so via the global Sentry). This function is executed in hub.run, and this works as expected. It adds the breadcrumb to the new Hub instead of the global Hub.

So there might be something wrong with the integrations?

[bartversluijs]

After some further investigation, it looks like the only problem is with the HTTP integration. I can't seem to get the HTTP breadcrumbs to work with just a function, so not with the ExpressJS integrations.

I've made an example, which doesn't create a breadcrumb for the HTTP(S) request:

const Sentry = require("@sentry/node");
const https = require("https");

Sentry.init({
  dsn: "DSN HERE"
})

https.get("https://www.google.com/", (resp) => {

  let data = "";

  resp.on("data", (chunck) => {
    data += chunck;
  });

  resp.on("end", () => {
    Sentry.captureMessage("Response OK")
  })

}).on("error", err => {
  Sentry.captureException(err);
})

I've tested it with the request package and with the http/https library from NodeJS.
I've also integrated Sentry in another project, which is a REST API via ExpressJS, and there all HTTP request are getting logged in breadcrumbs. I'd like to know if it is expected behavior? As you all know, the more information, the better when dealing with errors 🙂

Thanks in advance! And I'm sorry for my spamming.

[kamilogorek]

@VeDicium can you check http module instead? I tested locally and can confirm that it's broken for https, but functional for http