ref(node): Avoid double wrapping http module for vercel on Node
#16178
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
mydea
force-pushed
the
fn/patch-response-channel
branch
from
67ee12d to
512e319
Compare
Contributor
size-limit report 📦
|
mydea
force-pushed
the
fn/http-instrumentation-diagnostics-channel
branch
from
72ddee3 to
596dcee
Compare
Contributor
|
Would you mind explaining in the PR description why we do this and what this PR does? I can see us going back to this in 3 months and asking ourselves wtf |
mydea
force-pushed
the
fn/http-instrumentation-diagnostics-channel
branch
from
aff551f to
0cd1834
Compare
Base automatically changed from
fn/http-instrumentation-diagnostics-channel
to
develop
May 5, 2025 12:24
mydea
force-pushed
the
fn/patch-response-channel
branch
from
512e319 to
96423b2
Compare
mydea
changed the title
http module for vercel-edgehttp module for vercel on Node
Contributor
|
To recapitulate, what needs to happen for the logic to still work is to register the Findings so far, because the current approach doesn't work:
tldr we have no good place to register the |
mydea
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 6, 2025
As pre-work for #16178, actually add a test for this (kind of). This showed that there was actually a fundamental flaw here, as we looked as the `req` not the `res`, oops.
mydea
force-pushed
the
fn/patch-response-channel
branch
from
96423b2 to
8e6d77e
Compare
lforst
approved these changes
May 7, 2025
Member
Author
|
OK we can't get this to work on Vercel on prod, so we'll just remove this for now until we get a better handle on this 😬 cc @lforst |
Contributor
|
I am in support of removing |
Member
Author
|
Replaced by #16217 |
mydea
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 7, 2025
We could never get this to apply properly on vercel in production, so we're removing this for now and may revisit this later. Replaces #16178
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.
This PR is a follow up to #16177
There, we found out that double-wrapping (with
stealthWrap) the http module seems to break in ESM mode, for whatever reason - us double-wrapping this leads to the OTEL-instrumentation creating spans twice, for whatever reason.We removed this for the core sentry-http instrumentation, but we still do it for vercel-edge here. For consistency, this cleans this up so we should be safe.
As an added benefit, it again leads to all the sentry-specific instrumentation code to be in one place, and to us not having to care about instrumentation order, hopefully, if this actually works.