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

client, server: record basic telemetry events #143

Open
wants to merge 17 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

samcowger
Copy link
Contributor

In furtherance of #125, this implements generation and serialization of timestamped telemetry events for several key points in the server/verification lifecycle, mentioned in that issue:

  • Server startup
  • Server shutdown
  • File open
  • File close
  • Beginning of verification attempt
  • End of verification, including outcome

It also updates the client to allow a user to choose whether to collect and where to store telemetry. This collection is disabled by default.

This leaves some aspects of #125 unimplemented:

  1. Generation/collection and serialization of user profile information (e.g. user identifiers, expertise levels)
  2. Recording telemetry on {re,}configuration of client/server preferences
  3. Determining and ascribing task identifiers to telemetry events

There are no technical blockers to implementing (1) and (2), and they're next on my list. I think there are also no technical blockers for (3), but I don't yet know how, abstractly, we want to define a task. (@kschleisman, I'm hoping we can cover this when you're in town next week.)

@samcowger samcowger requested a review from thatplguy January 21, 2025 22:53
@samcowger samcowger self-assigned this Jan 21, 2025
@samcowger samcowger force-pushed the sc/cn-lsp-telemetry branch from 52441a6 to e8233fc Compare January 22, 2025 00:10
@samcowger samcowger force-pushed the sc/cn-lsp-telemetry branch from e8233fc to 15123dd Compare January 22, 2025 00:57
samcowger added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 22, 2025
I've run into trouble with multiple configurations in #143, since that
introduces dependencies between these local packages. This approach seems to
solve those problems, and I think it's somewhat more idiomatic anyway.
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.

1 participant