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

Include RequestBody information in ErrorRecordLog table for Internal and External ErrorTypes #114

Open
himeshr opened this issue Jan 12, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@himeshr
Copy link

himeshr commented Jan 12, 2024

Motivation

Integration Support team would be monitoring Metabase reports to resolved integration errors.
In a large number of cases, the issue is with mismatch in inventory count, to resolve which they would need to be able to view the Request body content, for User info, location details and inventory info.

Therefore, we would need to include RequestBody information for an ErrorRecordLog.
This is needed only for Errors with FollowUp step: Internal and External.

Acceptance Criteria

  • In avni_int Database, a new table ErrorMiscInfo exists with column id(long) and error_misc_info'(blob)
  • In avni_int Database, ErrorRecordLog table has ErrorMiscInfo.Id as part of 'error_misc_info' column (Optional, default null)
  • ErrorMiscInfo table should be populated with errored_request_body as an escaped string json content
{
"id": 123, 
"errored_request_body" : "{{Escaped request json}}",
"extra_info_field_2" : "",
...
}
  • This ErrorMiscInfo table should be populated only for ErrorRecordLogs with FollowUp step:
    • Internal or
    • External.
@himeshr himeshr added good first issue Good for newcomers Goonj labels Jan 12, 2024
@mahalakshme
Copy link

mahalakshme commented Jan 12, 2024

@vinayvenu for this should we charge the client? @himeshr let me know if u know about this, so moving to 'In Analysis Review'. Recently contract sigining process is going on, doing this to prevent working on any other route.

@mahalakshme
Copy link

@himeshr we need to charge for integration service changes as well from what I know.

@mahalakshme
Copy link

mahalakshme commented Jan 29, 2024

@arjunk @vinayvenu moving this to hold since awaiting ur reply on the above and this cant be anymore part of 7.0 release.

@vedfordev vedfordev removed the good first issue Good for newcomers label Feb 26, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
Status: Hold
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants