utils.extractDuration: improved json detection #276
Closed
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
Owner
|
@adambezecny thanks for opening this PR! Unfortunately, the JSON case is actually multi-line JSON (so the JSON.parse check wouldn't work). Anyway, the good news is that this issue was properly addressed in #268 :) Closing this PR. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
the fact that log string checked by extractDuration function starts with curly bracket character does not mean this string is valid json. Because of this it is better to test via new function isValidJSON introduced in this PR.
The motivation behind this pull request is that we have seen executor lambda failures while testing our lambda. When investigating what is going on we found out the log captured by extractDurationFromJSON i not valid json that could be processed by current logic. See my comments and sample log data on issue 261.
using new json validation in this case enforces parsing by extractDurationFromText, not by extractDurationFromJSON which works in this case.