Skip to content

Conversation

@da2ce7
Copy link
Contributor

@da2ce7 da2ce7 commented Nov 19, 2024

When making this pull request I found that there was logic for the UDP tracker when in private mode: that we do not support, so I removed this dead-code.

I also found that the ConnectionId was not being checked for scrape requests, and when parsing badly formatted requests, so I corrected for this.

I also added the statistic counting for how many error responses have been sent.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 21, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 80.64516% with 18 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 76.25%. Comparing base (b827c31) to head (8c70395).
Report is 2 commits behind head on develop.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/core/statistics.rs 0.00% 12 Missing ⚠️
src/servers/udp/handlers.rs 90.32% 6 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #1095      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    76.44%   76.25%   -0.19%     
===========================================
  Files          174      174              
  Lines        11488    11377     -111     
  Branches     11488    11377     -111     
===========================================
- Hits          8782     8676     -106     
+ Misses        2507     2503       -4     
+ Partials       199      198       -1     

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


🚨 Try these New Features:

- remove old logging module
- remove udp test for private mode
- check `ConnectionID` for scrape
- check `ConnectionID` when included in badly formatted responses
- pass-through any errors when parsing a response
@da2ce7 da2ce7 force-pushed the 20241120_udp_logging branch from 7db536d to 8c70395 Compare November 21, 2024 01:30
@da2ce7 da2ce7 changed the title udp: improve logging udp: improve logging (and vairous changes) Nov 21, 2024
@da2ce7 da2ce7 marked this pull request as ready for review November 21, 2024 01:33
@da2ce7 da2ce7 requested a review from josecelano November 21, 2024 02:22
Copy link
Member

@josecelano josecelano left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Gi @da2ce7 I think having the error counter in stats is a good feature. The only way to check errors now is to log into the server and check logs. At least, I can load the API enpoint to get that info. Althougth It only includes only the handled protocol errors.

@josecelano
Copy link
Member

ACK 8c70395

@josecelano josecelano merged commit 83816bc into torrust:develop Nov 21, 2024
17 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants