get locals on all stack frames

[wiltzius]

I find the with_locals feature really useful. It helps give the data context needed to spot issues quickly in many cases.

Unfortunately, we only seem to get locals for the first ~12 and last ~12 stack frames in our Python project. Because almost all of that is framework code in both cases (request handling up top, error handling at the bottom), we rarely get the locals relevant to our business logic.

Is there some way to get stack locals for all (or at least most) frames? I understand this might be arbitrarily expensive, but just having a way to increase the limit would be helpful

[untitaker]

@wiltzius you can set in_app_include and in_app_exclude to mark specific frames as part of your application vs not being part: https://docs.sentry.io/error-reporting/configuration/?platform=python#in-app-include

E.g. if your app is in a python module foobar, set init(in_app_include=["foobar"]).

The server should then start trimming framework frames first.

Which framework are you using? We should set this automatically.

[wiltzius]

Cool, thank you. in_app_include is just what we need.

The framework in question sorta depends on the bug. We use Pyramid as a web framework and Celery as the task runner, so those are at the top of the stack, but at the bottom sometimes its a deep SqlAlchemy stack trace or Python logging framework.

We aren't on the latest version so I'll update it when I modify in_app_include and see if the auto-detect works better.

[untitaker]

Sorry for the confusion: The latest version doesn't do it any better. I only created a follow-up ticket to do this at some point.

[wiltzius]

I'm still having trouble with this. I upgraded to the unified client,
but in_app_excludes doesn't seem to work unless you also set in_app_includes. I eventually tracked it down to here:

sentry-python/sentry_sdk/utils.py

Line 610 in 3735cb5

if _module_in_set(module, in_app_exclude):

the fallback for any_in_app over-triggers if you don't have in_app_includes set to anything (since nothing is explicitly marked in). I'd expect anything that isn't excluded would be included, but not so.

Docs don't mention this behavior, is it intended? It's unfortunately an annoyance for us, since we've got a large number of packages that are "ours" and we would want to include, and nobody's going to remember to update this list when they add a new one.

[untitaker]

The fact that init(in_app_exclude=[...]) doesn't work is definetly a bug. I will make a note in #320, thanks for reporting. I will prioritize fixing this in the next week because I can't think of a workaround you could use right now.

I would set in_app_include regardless. I wonder if you could hack something together where you discover installed packages at runtime and filter them by author information (assuming all those packages of yours do have the same author set). Presumably pkg_resources has metadata about this.

[wiltzius]

Thanks for filing the bug.

It's actually even a little bit more confusing, I think. You need to set both the in_app_exclude and the in_app_include for it to have any effect. If you set only one, the rest default to the same value (it seems).

I was able to use setuptools.find_packages to get a list of the packages we care about, so that handles the include issue I mentioned above.

[wiltzius]

I think fixing this is as simple as adding a tiny bit of logic in the line I mentioned above to default stack frames to the "other" value if only one of in_app_exclude or in_app_include is set.

[untitaker]

Yeah, I have a PR open and hope to make a release soon. Thanks for taking the time to investigate this yourself.

…

On Fri, Apr 5, 2019, 20:33 Tom Wiltzius ***@***.***> wrote: I think fixing this is as simple as adding a tiny bit of logic in the line I mentioned above to default stack frames to the "other" value if only one of in_app_exclude or in_app_include is set. — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#316 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAzHxdP8urWuiz7cxVWdSFcEPssUfBNZks5vd5cJgaJpZM4cZWyj> .

[untitaker]

@wiltzius 0.7.10 should allow you to use in_app_exclude properly. #320 is still open for doing this for most frameworks automatically.