| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 78bf4f2fb0
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Sorry, something went wrong.
Signed-off-by: kurochan <kuro@kurochan.org>
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Summary
Separate Datadog sink configuration validation from runtime construction.
In restricted environments such as CI, containers, and AI coding-agent sandboxes,
vector validate --no-environment is expected to validate structural configuration
without opening outbound connections or initializing runtime resources such as native
TLS trust stores.
Previously, Datadog sink validation could reach runtime client/TLS construction even
when no outbound request was made. In restricted sandbox environments, the macOS
Keychain may be unavailable; attempting to load native root certificates through it
caused validation to panic.
This PR makes the boundary explicit:
traces sinks into ValidatedSink::validate.
in the runtime build path.
TracesSink::run lifecycle.
delay shutdown indefinitely.
verification is disabled.
sink-specific validation/build drift.
Regular vector validate continues to build all sinks and remains the validation
mode for errors that require effective runtime construction. --no-environment
intentionally does not guarantee detection of every runtime construction error.
The APM flusher acknowledgement confirms that the final flush was attempted; it does
not guarantee that Datadog accepted the payload.
References
N/A
Vector configuration
No new user configuration was added. Unit tests cover the Datadog logs, metrics,
events, and traces sinks with their existing inline configurations and custom
endpoints.
How did you test this PR?
Is this a breaking change?
Does this PR include user facing changes?