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

Add action name to Rack environment #445

Open
timriley opened this issue Jun 26, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #446
Open

Add action name to Rack environment #445

timriley opened this issue Jun 26, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #446

Comments

@timriley
Copy link
Member

This will help APM products like AppSignal integrate with Hanami actions without monkey patches.

See this forum post and the corresponding AppSignal PR (appsignal/appsignal-ruby#1113) for details.

tombruijn added a commit to tombruijn/hanami-controller that referenced this issue Jun 27, 2024
I created a [new topic] on the Hanami Discourse about improving the
AppSignal APM instrumentation.

To group requests, we would like to know what action it took place in.
This information is currently not available in the request environment.

For us, the easiest would be to access the action instance. That gives
us the class information and a way to access the `params_class` to fetch
all the parameters of the request: query params and the body payload.

This change adds the action instance on a new request environment key
`hanami.action_instance`.

[new topic]: https://discourse.hanamirb.org/t/questions-for-improving-the-appsignal-apm-integration-with-hanami-2/989/3

I had to update one test to not fail on the action instance being
returned, which is not important for that spec I think.

Closes hanami#445
@tombruijn tombruijn linked a pull request Jun 27, 2024 that will close this issue
@tombruijn
Copy link

I've tried to solve this issue in #446 🙂

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants