Skip to content

Conversation

@mikecdavis
Copy link
Contributor

…ug level

Info level logging on this is causing us two problems:

  1. It's spamming our logs (which company wide are info) with this log line
  2. We don't want the datafile name, which happens to correspond to the api key in our logs either

Debug solves both of these and we can optionally turn it on if we are seeing issues with datafile fetching.

Summary

  • The "what"; a concise description of each logical change
  • Another change

The "why", or other context.

Test plan

Issues

…ug level

Info level logging on this is causing us two problems:

1) It's spamming our logs (which company wide are info) with this log line
2) We don't want the datafile name, which happens to correspond to the api key in our logs either

Debug solves both of these and we can optionally turn it on if we are seeing issues with datafile fetching.
Copy link
Contributor

@aliabbasrizvi aliabbasrizvi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 27, 2020

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1360

  • 1 of 1 (100.0%) changed or added relevant line in 1 file are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at 89.354%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 1353: 0.0%
Covered Lines: 3777
Relevant Lines: 4227

💛 - Coveralls

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.

6 participants