feat: bug fix for segregating entrypoint spans and root spans in span filtering

[eKuG]

Summary

bug fix for segregating entrypoint spans and root spans in span filtering

Related Issues / PR's

Screenshots

NA

Affected Areas and Manually Tested Areas

---

Important

Fixes span filtering in buildSpanScopeQuery to correctly segregate entrypoint spans by ensuring parent_span_id is not empty.

• Behavior:
  • Fixes span filtering in buildSpanScopeQuery in query_builder.go to correctly segregate entrypoint spans by adding parent_span_id != '' condition.
• Tests:
  • Updates Test_buildTracesQuery in query_builder_test.go to reflect the new condition for entrypoint spans, ensuring parent_span_id != '' is included in the expected query.

^{This description was created by for 2416617. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[ellipsis-dev]

👍 Looks good to me! Reviewed everything up to 2416617 in 1 minute and 5 seconds

More details

• Looked at 26 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 4 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. pkg/query-service/app/traces/v4/query_builder.go:232

• Draft comment:
  Added 'AND parent_span_id != '' condition to segregate entrypoint spans from root spans. Confirm that this extra filter covers all edge cases for entrypoint spans.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Marked as duplicate.

2. pkg/query-service/app/traces/v4/query_builder_test.go:562

• Draft comment:
  Updated expected query for entrypoint spans to include 'AND parent_span_id != '''. Verify that this aligns with the intended bug fix.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

3. pkg/query-service/app/traces/v4/query_builder.go:232

• Draft comment:
  The query for entrypoint spans now correctly filters out root spans by adding AND parent_span_id != ''. Confirm that using an empty string is the intended check (vs. handling possible NULLs).
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
  This comment asks the author to verify their implementation choice, which violates the rule "Do NOT ask the PR author to confirm their intention or double-check things". The code shows consistent use of empty string for parent_span_id checks. The comment is speculative about potential NULL values without evidence that this is actually an issue.
  Maybe there's a real issue with NULL values that could cause bugs? Maybe this is a critical validation that needs to happen?
  The code shows consistent use of empty string checks for parent_span_id throughout, including for root spans. Without evidence that NULL values are possible or problematic, this is just speculation.
  Delete this comment. It asks for verification without strong evidence of an issue, and the code shows consistent use of empty string checks.

4. pkg/query-service/app/traces/v4/query_builder_test.go:569

• Draft comment:
  Updated expected output in test 'test noop list view with entry_point_spans' to include the new condition. Verify this aligns with the intended behavior.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 0% <= threshold 50%
  This comment is asking the PR author to verify if the updated expected output aligns with the intended behavior. This violates the rule against asking the author to confirm their intention or ensure behavior is intended.

Workflow ID: wflow_6NYTr1q9CpMUkp12

---

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.