Add query time to logger #3010
Merged
Add query time to logger #3010
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
fulghum
reviewed
Jun 3, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like adding the new field, instead of replacing the connectTime field. People could probably also change their logger format to include the time, which is a good practice, and this would duplicate that, but could still be worth including.
Code changes looked fine, but Claude got pretty messy with the tests. 🤖
Co-authored-by: Jason Fulghum <jason@dolthub.com>
Co-authored-by: Jason Fulghum <jason@dolthub.com>
Co-authored-by: Jason Fulghum <jason@dolthub.com>
fulghum
reviewed
Jun 3, 2025
fulghum
approved these changes
Jun 3, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a proposed fix for Dolt issue: dolthub/dolt#8909
I'm not certain if we want to just add this field or replace connect time. I think this implementation is safer.