Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: fix decode empty ranges [backport 2.6] #8485

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 22, 2024
Merged

Conversation

github-actions[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented Feb 22, 2024

Backport 5c22eba from #8470 to 2.6.

Description

Fix some cases where calling the decode aspect could return 0-sized ranges.

Checklist

  • Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description
  • Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR
  • Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability)
  • Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
  • Library release note guidelines are followed or label changelog/no-changelog is set
  • Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, public corp docs)
  • Backport labels are set (if applicable)
  • If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified @DataDog/apm-tees.
  • If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from @DataDog/security-design-and-guidance.

Reviewer Checklist

  • Title is accurate
  • All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
  • Description motivates each change
  • Avoids breaking API changes
  • Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
  • Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
  • Release note makes sense to a user of the library
  • Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
  • Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the release branch maintenance policy

Sorry, something went wrong.

## Description

Fix some cases where calling the `decode` aspect could return 0-sized
ranges.

## Checklist

- [X] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description
- [X] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR
- [X] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability)
- [X] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
- [X] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set
- [X] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/))
- [X] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))
- [X] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified
`@DataDog/apm-tees`.
- [X] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages,
or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from
`@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.

## Reviewer Checklist

- [x] Title is accurate
- [x] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
- [x] Description motivates each change
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library
- [x] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications
of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)

---------

Signed-off-by: Juanjo Alvarez <juanjo.alvarezmartinez@datadoghq.com>
Co-authored-by: Federico Mon <federico.mon@datadoghq.com>
(cherry picked from commit 5c22eba)
@datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn
Copy link

Datadog Report

Branch report: backport-8470-to-2.6
Commit report: 52786c2
Test service: dd-trace-py

✅ 0 Failed, 110117 Passed, 976 Skipped, 1h 47m 2.45s Total duration (14m 24.51s time saved)

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Feb 22, 2024

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2024-02-22 11:54:13

Comparing candidate commit 52786c2 in PR branch backport-8470-to-2.6 with baseline commit 831e403 in branch 2.6.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 195 metrics, 9 unstable metrics.

@gnufede gnufede enabled auto-merge (squash) February 22, 2024 13:17
@gnufede gnufede closed this Feb 22, 2024
auto-merge was automatically disabled February 22, 2024 13:17

Pull request was closed

@gnufede gnufede reopened this Feb 22, 2024
@gnufede gnufede enabled auto-merge (squash) February 22, 2024 13:17
@gnufede gnufede merged commit ca697fd into 2.6 Feb 22, 2024
51 checks passed
@gnufede gnufede deleted the backport-8470-to-2.6 branch February 22, 2024 13:50
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.

None yet

2 participants