oxidecomputer / oxidecomputer/diesel-dtrace

Consider using `diesel::connection::Instrumentation` instead of bringing your own connection type

Open
#52 2 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
Rust
Stars
8
Forks
1
Avg merge
14h 13m
Merged PRs (30d)
4

Description

Diesel introduced a way to instrument existing connection implementations with diesel 2.2. The entry point for this is Connection::set_instrumentation. You can easily define your own instrumentation handler by implementing the Instrumentation trait or you could just provide a handler function. I think this could greatly simplify diesel-dtrace as it only would need to provide that single type and handle the events it's actually interested in.

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Review the repository's custom Diesel connection type and compare it with Diesel 2.2's Connection::set_instrumentation entry point and Instrumentation trait. Map the existing DTrace probes to the instrumentation events they need; done means the custom connection approach is replaced while the relevant probes remain supported.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
rust
Domain
observability
Issue type
Refactor
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
42/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.