8000 Improve detail of E2E test assertions by adinauer · Pull Request #4543 · getsentry/sentry-java · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content

Improve detail of E2E test assertions #4543

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Jul 8, 2025
Merged

Improve detail of E2E test assertions #4543

merged 11 commits into from
Jul 8, 2025

Conversation

adinauer
Copy link
Member
@adinauer adinauer commented Jul 7, 2025

#skip-changelog

📜 Description

Improve detail of E2E test assertions

💡 Motivation and Context

The latest bump of OpenTelemetry changed some op and description values. These improved assertions should help catch similar problems.

💚 How did you test it?

📝 Checklist

  • I added tests to verify the changes.
  • No new PII added or SDK only sends newly added PII if sendDefaultPII is enabled.
  • I updated the docs if needed.
  • I updated the wizard if needed.
  • Review from the native team if needed.
  • No breaking change or entry added to the changelog.
  • No breaking change for hybrid SDKs or communicated to hybrid SDKs.

🔮 Next steps

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor
github-actions bot commented Jul 7, 2025 •
edited
Loading
Messages
📖 Do not forget to update Sentry-docs with your feature once the pull request gets approved.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 4d67f9c

@lcian
Copy link
Member
lcian commented Jul 7, 2025

So I notice now that there's a mismatch between the span op and name between OTEL and non-OTEL.
Is that fine? Any reason why we would want/not want to normalize these to be the same between the two?

@adinauer
Copy link
Member Author
adinauer commented Jul 7, 2025

Yeah, ideally we align them. This will require a major IMO. We can create a GH issue to track and address it on the next major bump.

@adinauer adinauer mentioned this pull request Jul 8, 2025
Open
@adinauer
Copy link
Member Author
adinauer commented Jul 8, 2025

Created #4547 for aligning.

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor
github-actions bot commented Jul 8, 2025 R 8000 26;
edited
Loading

Performance metrics 🚀

  Plain With Sentry Diff
Startup time 429.77 ms 494.45 ms 64.68 ms
Size 1.58 MiB 2.09 MiB 519.06 KiB

Previous results on branch: feat/more-detailed-e2e-assertions

Startup times

Revision Plain With Sentry Diff
10ab81c 440.73 ms 490.04 ms 49.31 ms

App size

Revision Plain With Sentry Diff
10ab81c 1.58 MiB 2.09 MiB 519.06 KiB

@adinauer adinauer merged commit 7606f3f into main Jul 8, 2025
34 checks passed
@adinauer adinauer deleted the feat/more-detailed-e2e-assertions branch July 8, 2025 14:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@lcian lcian lcian approved these changes

@romtsn romtsn Awaiting requested review from romtsn romtsn is a code owner

@stefanosiano stefanosiano Awaiting requested review from stefanosiano stefanosiano is a code owner

@markushi markushi Awaiting requested review from markushi markushi is a code owner

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@adinauer @lcian @getsentry-bot
0