Apm: Harmonize on name and meaning of IGNORE_URLS-ish config option
Description of the issue
Most (all?) agents have a config option ignore_urls (or similar, see below) to ignore certain transactions by URL, using pattern matching. Unfortunately, there are subtle and not-so-subtle differences across agents:
- Java and Go: a list of wildcard matchers
- Node: A list of items that can be either regexes or strings
- Ruby: a list of regexes. Also, the option is called
ignore_url_patterns - Python: A list of regexes. Also, the option is called
transaction_ignore_patterns. Oh, and it's matched against the transaction name, not the URL (historically, this is so it can also be used for non-HTTP transactions, like background jobs) - then I stopped...
These differences in both naming and semantics make it difficult to use this config option in a remote config scenario. Therefore, we should harmonize.
Semantics is probably the easier of the two: I propose that we follow the lead of the Java and Go agent, and use wildcard matching on the path part of the URL itself (not the parametrized URL pattern).
As for naming, using IGNORE_URLS or IGNORE_URL_PATTERNS poses the difficulty that they are already used with different semantics by some agents (the former by Node, the latter by Ruby). Therefore, I propose to use TRANSACTION_IGNORE_URLS, assuming that all agents only apply this config option to transactions, not errors or metrics (if that's not the case in your current implementation, please speak up!).
What we are voting on
All agents will add a new config option, TRANSACTION_IGNORE_URLS, which will use glob matching. It will be case insensitive by default. There is no required deprecation path for old config values, each agent team can decide that for themselves.
Vote
| Agent | Yes | No | Indifferent | N/A | Link to agent issue | Central Kibana Config
| --------|:----:|:---:|:-----------:|:----:|:-------------------:|:-------------------:|
| .NET |
- [x]
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]
| Go |
- [x]
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]
| Java |
- [x]
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]
| Node.js |
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]
| Python |
- [x]
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]
| Ruby |
- [x]
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]
| RUM |
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [x]
| PHP |
- [x]
- [ ]
- [ ]
- [ ]
beniwohli
All 18 comments
I agree on adding TRANSACTION_ to the option name to be explicit about what it actually does.
I guess if it ends in _URL it should probably only match URLs and not transaction names? These are not alike in Ruby (nor Java AFAIK).
Wildcard matchers are probably a better idea than regexes IMO. I suppose even _only_ supporting * could be enough?
mikker
on 12 Sep 2019
Strictly speaking, I think we're matching _paths_ and not _URLs_? /ping and not http://example.com/ping. /ping would work although not a full URL.
mikker
on 12 Sep 2019
@mikker regarding wildcards, I think we should all try and match the behavior of WildcardMatcher in the Java agent, including optional case insensitivity.
Regarding URL, yes, my proposal is to match against the "raw" path, thanks for the clarification. I'll update the description.
beniwohli
on 12 Sep 2019
IMO, the IGNORE_URLS as is defined for the backend agents (which applies to incoming request) is not a good fit for the RUM agent. Please raise your concerns regarding this and we can reconsider.
jahtalab
on 18 Sep 2019
@jahtalab can you go into a bit more details of why you think it isn't a good fit? You talked a bit about it in our agents meeting, but for posterity's sake, and possibly as a base for further discussion, it would be nice if you wrote it up.
Personally, I think the most important thing we need to make sure is harmonized amongst agents is user expectations. If I add /admin/* to TRANSACTION_IGNORE_URLS, I don't want to see any transactions from that URL. If that's what happens on the RUM agent, I think it would be fine to use the same setting there, even if the exact interpretation and implementation may be somewhat different.
beniwohli
on 18 Sep 2019
Conceptually I tend to separate the configuration used for incoming request in the backend and the url of a page visited in the browser. Having two different meaning for the same configuration option tends to create problems down the line. For example, in the backend agent the request URL is used by default as the transaction name but this is not the case for the RUM agent and we let the user to set the name of the page load transaction.
Furthermore, the RUM agent has ignoreTransactions config option which is a better fit since a transaction is not always guaranteed to have a url (e.g. route change transactions) but it will always have a name and at the same time the RUM agent doesn't face the challenges backend agents face with not being able to filter out transactions by name.
jahtalab
on 18 Sep 2019
Updated the "What we are voting on" piece of the issue, with the decisions made in today's agents meeting. I made an executive decision that it should be case insensitive by default. If you disagree please comment here. :)
basepi
on 14 Jan 2020
As "glob matching" or wildcard matching can mean lots of things, let's define that as well.
My take on it:
The wildcard character
*, matches zero or more characters. A wildcard may be at the beginning, in the middle or at the end of a matcher. Examples:/foo/*/bar/*/baz*, *foo*.
Matching is case insensitive by default. Prepending a matcher with(?-i)makes the matching case sensitive.
Single character wildcards (?) are not supported.
There is no escape character, so matching a literal*is not supported.
These constraints make it reasonable to both implement a matcher from scratch, like in https://github.com/elastic/apm-agent-java/blob/master/apm-agent-core/src/main/java/co/elastic/apm/agent/matcher/WildcardMatcher.java and to build a wildcard matcher based on regex. The latter would work by regex-quoting the input string and then replacing \* with .*.
felixbarny
on 14 Jan 2020
@felixbarny How worried are we about "accidentally" allowing for things like single character wildcards?
Python has fnmatch which is usually used for globbing. But I don't think you can turn features off, so should we plan on creating our own implementation or have hidden behavior? I'm not convinced that the more constrained specification is worth implementing it from scratch in each agent, even if it's only a few hundred lines of code.
basepi
on 14 Jan 2020
If there are quirks, people will inevitably come to rely on them (insert XKCD spacebar comic here). We could just say that they shouldn't do that, but I think it would be preferable to be consistent and exact. I think you could still use fnmatch, replacing ? with [?] and [ with [[], and get consistent behaviour.
axw
on 15 Jan 2020
FWIW, we already do have an implementation of wildcard matching in the Python agent
beniwohli
on 15 Jan 2020
I copied Python's approach for the Ruby agent, basically pulling all the *s, escaping anything else that would have special meaning, putting .* where the *s were, converting to regex.
(Very smart, @beniwohli!)
(Update: I see you described the approach already, Felix. Still smart 😉)
mikker
on 15 Jan 2020
@elastic/apm-agent-devs please leave your vote in the issue description 🙂
felixbarny
on 24 Mar 2020
Should we only match against the path, or also the query string?
Pro include query string: easy to add something like ?ignore_apm=true to any URL, e.g. for uptime checkers
Contra include query string: any URL with a query string would break the matching unless the user doesn't append a * to every configured URL.
I'm tending towards not including the query string
beniwohli
on 25 Mar 2020
I'm tending towards not including the query string
++
felixbarny
on 25 Mar 2020
As it seems there is an agreement on this with the new config name and behavior described in the description. (Except RUM, it's different...).
Some agents already linked implementation issues, I suggest the rest also creates and links those and we close this and start implementing it soon.
Reason I bring this up is that people are asking for this in .NET and I waited to see what we agree on here (I expect PHP will have the same situation). I will implement it for .NET according to the description above, but as it seems .NET will be the only one doing it this way and I see a little bit of a risk that we'll end up now with N+1 way of doing this.
So in sum: if you agree please add implementation issue for your corresponding agent and schedule it; and let's close this one since we agree on the new name and behavior which is in the issue description.
gregkalapos
on 16 Jul 2020
We discussed this is today's agent meeting.
- The issue description has the new name and the definition of the setting
- No objection to it, we go with that
- Opened implementation issues for all remaining agents
- RUM might consider supporting this option as the transaction names are set based on URL by default
- Currently targeted for ~7.9~ 7.10.
gregkalapos
on 28 Jul 2020
When implementing this change, agents should test against this common set of test cases to ensure interoperability: https://github.com/elastic/apm/pull/313
felixbarny
on 11 Aug 2020
Related issues
formgeist
·
7Comments
chemalopezp
·
5Comments
felixbarny
·
7Comments
bmorelli25
·
8Comments
roncohen
·
3Comments
Most helpful comment
++