feat: structured logging support for zerolog by aldy505 · Pull Request #1031 · getsentry/sentry-go

aldy505 · 2025-06-08T02:15:32Z

codecov · 2025-06-08T02:17:10Z

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 93.33333% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 85.65%. Comparing base (abc8abb) to head (5f87761).
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
zerolog/sentrylogger.go	93.33%	4 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1031      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   85.45%   85.65%   +0.19%     
==========================================
  Files          55       56       +1     
  Lines        5500     5575      +75     
==========================================
+ Hits         4700     4775      +75     
  Misses        655      655              
  Partials      145      145

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

aldy505 · 2025-06-08T02:19:34Z

zerolog/sentrylogger_test.go

+			name: "String array attribute",
+			logFunc: func(c *zerolog.Event) *zerolog.Event {
+				return c.Strs("foo", []string{"bar", "baz"})
+			},
+			wantAttributes: map[string]sentry.Attribute{
+				"foo.0": {Value: "bar", Type: "string"},
+				"foo.1": {Value: "baz", Type: "string"},


I'm not sure if this is the right behavior. If we see into open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3982, they said if we have an array attribute, it shouldn't be separated like this. But I don't really know the internals of the Trace Explorer.

The options would be:

foo.0 => bar, foo.1 => baz

foo => ["bar", "baz"]

Perhaps @AbhiPrasad can help with this?

Let's please not unfurl array properties into their own keys. Let's send them as a string for now, with the intention that in the future sentry ingestion will support arrays.

We do this unfurling pattern for message parameters (sentry.message.parameter.0) because we needed to make them indexed + queryable immediately for better product UX in the short term, but I want to avoid arbitrary user arrays to be done this way.

Good to know. Thanks Abhi!

AbhiPrasad

Instead of using a writer, can we use the hook system in zerolog? https://github.com/rs/zerolog/blob/master/README.md#hooks

I'd like us to avoid the overhead of encoding/decoding json if we can.

something like

type SentryLogHook struct{}

func (h SentryLogHook) Run(e *zerolog.Event, level zerolog.Level, msg string) {
    ctx := e.GetCtx()
    l := sentry.NewLogger(ctx)
    // need more complicated logic to parse the zerolog event
    l.WithLevel(convertLevel(level)).Log(ctx, msg)
}

logger := zerolog.New(os.Stdout).Hook(SentryLogHook{})

If we do have to use a writer, we should make it async.

AbhiPrasad · 2025-06-08T21:03:07Z

zerolog/sentrylogger.go

+		case zerolog.TimestampFieldName:
+			continue
+		default:
+			switch valueType := value.(type) {


shouldn't we have a case for int here?

I did test it with every possible Go types. Yet everything falls down to just 3 types (plus their array variant): string, boolean, float64

We'll want to still explicitly use attribute.Int because we treat these differently in the backend. In the future there will be operations you can only do on integers you can can't use on floats.

AbhiPrasad · 2025-06-08T21:07:31Z

zerolog/sentrylogger.go

+// Close should not be called directly.
+// It should be called internally by zerolog.
+func (s SentryLogger) Close() error {
+	sentry.Flush(time.Second)


should we make this configurable?

Perhaps, yes.

AbhiPrasad · 2025-06-08T21:10:25Z

zerolog/sentrylogger.go

+				l.SetAttributes(attribute.Bool(field, valueType))
+			case float64:
+				l.SetAttributes(attribute.Float64(field, float64(valueType)))
+			case []any:


we should have a default case here that just serializes the value and sends as a string type.

AbhiPrasad · 2025-06-08T21:20:13Z

zerolog/sentrylogger.go

+			hub = sentry.NewHub(nil, sentry.NewScope())
+		}
+
+		ctx = sentry.SetHubOnContext(context.Background(), hub)


Suggested change

ctx = sentry.SetHubOnContext(context.Background(), hub)

ctx = sentry.SetHubOnContext(ctx, hub)

No can't do. You must assume that the previous ctx is nil.

really? do you have links to code/docs about this?

AbhiPrasad · 2025-06-08T21:22:11Z

zerolog/sentrylogger.go

+	var message string
+	for field, value := range evt {
+		switch field {
+		case zerolog.LevelFieldName:


these names can be customized: https://github.com/rs/zerolog/blob/master/README.md#customize-automatic-field-names

we prob need a helper

func (s SentryLogger) getFieldNames() (level, message, timestamp string) { return zerolog.LevelFieldName, zerolog.MessageFieldName, zerolog.TimestampFieldName }

aldy505 · 2025-06-09T00:36:38Z

Instead of using a writer, can we use the hook system in zerolog? https://github.com/rs/zerolog/blob/master/README.md#hooks

I'd like us to avoid the overhead of encoding/decoding json if we can.

something like
type SentryLogHook struct{}

func (h SentryLogHook) Run(e *zerolog.Event, level zerolog.Level, msg string) {
    ctx := e.GetCtx()
    l := sentry.NewLogger(ctx)
    // need more complicated logic to parse the zerolog event
    l.WithLevel(convertLevel(level)).Log(ctx, msg)
}

logger := zerolog.New(os.Stdout).Hook(SentryLogHook{})

@AbhiPrasad I've tried the Hook, didn't work. The Hook has this interface signature:

Run(e *Event, level Level, message string)

In which:

e *Event is write only, you cannot read the properties/attributes already set to that event
level Level is useful yes, but for level only
message string only contains the message, you can't acquire the attributes here

If we do have to use a writer, we should make it async.

Yes we might want to go to this direction.

cleptric · 2025-06-09T00:49:10Z

Can we please discuss implementation prior opening PRs @aldy505. This is really unproductive else.

AbhiPrasad · 2025-06-09T13:48:20Z

write only, you cannot read the properties/attributes already set to that event

wow thats annoying

Let's explore the async writer then. Let's discuss this in the GH issue, and then come back to the PR. We might even want to open up a new PR so we don't get lost in the feedback here.

giortzisg · 2025-06-16T08:15:05Z

Hey @aldy505, I was already working on the integration, and since there are enough changes from the current version, it will be easier for me to close the PR and take over myself.

feat: structured logging support for zerolog

5f87761

Closes getsentry#1029

aldy505 commented Jun 8, 2025

View reviewed changes

AbhiPrasad suggested changes Jun 8, 2025

View reviewed changes

giortzisg closed this Jun 16, 2025

	ctx = sentry.SetHubOnContext(context.Background(), hub)
	ctx = sentry.SetHubOnContext(ctx, hub)

Conversation

aldy505 commented Jun 8, 2025

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jun 8, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AbhiPrasad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AbhiPrasad Jun 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aldy505 commented Jun 9, 2025

Uh oh!

cleptric commented Jun 9, 2025

Uh oh!

AbhiPrasad commented Jun 9, 2025

Uh oh!

giortzisg commented Jun 16, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

codecov bot commented Jun 8, 2025 •

edited

Loading

AbhiPrasad Jun 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading