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: Do not capture SQL params for now #503

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Sep 19, 2019
Merged

fix: Do not capture SQL params for now #503

merged 5 commits into from Sep 19, 2019

Conversation

untitaker
Copy link
Member

We have memory usage issues for very large queries, because large params are held in memory (spans or breadcrumb buffer). Do not capture SQL params for now.

Copy link
Member

@HazAT HazAT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wdyt about having _experiements.record_params Ture | False

And leave the code that captures them?
Default should be False

@amureki
Copy link

amureki commented Sep 19, 2019

Greetings @untitaker and thank you for taking care of python Sentry SDK!

Could we elaborate a bit on the issue? Is it written anywhere with some details?

One of my team's big Django applications is using now sentry-sdk==0.7.14, because from version 0.8.0 we are having constant request timeouts (tried versions 0.8, 0.10). Sadly I am still not able to reproduce it on test servers (probably depends on the app load) and can't understand the reason for it.

So I am wondering if our issue is related to what is described here and might be solved by this PR.

@untitaker
Copy link
Member Author

@amureki I have no clue... please create a new issue

Copy link
Member

@HazAT HazAT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

:glock:

@amureki
Copy link

amureki commented Sep 19, 2019

@untitaker I would create a new issue when I would be able to gather more details on our case.
But I was wondering, how did you find this case you are solving here? Was it one of the customers issue? How did it come up? I am just trying to match the symptoms here...

@untitaker
Copy link
Member Author

@amureki Without disclosing too much customer information, the issue that triggered this was a long running celery task that fired a lot of DB queries with massive params list each. In the specific case this created an OOM

Theoretically you can have a long-running web request that does the same thing but this seems unrelated. I assume this will generally improve memory usage though, but it doesn't seem like that's your problem.

I would create a new issue anyway. having a version range where it works and doesn't work might be good enough. Thanks

@untitaker untitaker merged commit 36b88ff into master Sep 19, 2019
@untitaker untitaker deleted the fix/nuke-params branch September 19, 2019 14:40
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

3 participants