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

Fix thread names in dbt server logs #1905

Closed
drewbanin opened this issue Nov 8, 2019 · 0 comments · Fixed by #2002
Closed

Fix thread names in dbt server logs #1905

drewbanin opened this issue Nov 8, 2019 · 0 comments · Fixed by #2002
Labels
bug Something isn't working rpc Issues related to dbt's RPC server
Milestone

Comments

@drewbanin
Copy link
Contributor

Describe the bug

The dbt server logging output shows "QueueFeederThread" as the source for all log output. This isn't correct - the logs are actually being emitted by threads named things like master or Thread-3. Let's update the log handling code to print the correct thread name in the structured logs.

This change will help us better understand:

  1. parallelized execution in dbt
  2. per-thread connections and query pooling

Expected behavior

The thread_name in structured log output in the dbt server responses (like from poll) should render out as master or Thread-N or similar, not QueueFeederThread.

Screenshots and log output

Screen Shot 2019-11-08 at 12 10 21 PM

The output of dbt --version:

0.15.0-b3

The operating system you're using:
macOS

The output of python --version:
Py3.7.5

@drewbanin drewbanin added bug Something isn't working rpc Issues related to dbt's RPC server labels Nov 8, 2019
@drewbanin drewbanin added this to the 0.15.1 milestone Nov 20, 2019
beckjake added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 13, 2019
call pull_information() before we enqueue the log record (#1905)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working rpc Issues related to dbt's RPC server
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant