Revert "contrib/bradfitz/gomemcache: trace item info for memcached operations" #664
Conversation
This file contains 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
gbbr
previously approved these changes
May 18, 2020
|
I think you need to rebase this. |
knusbaum
force-pushed
the
revert-642-memcached-tags
branch
from
a007850 to
6c15fe8
Compare
gbbr
approved these changes
May 22, 2020
mingrammer
pushed a commit
to mingrammer/dd-trace-go
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2020
…erations (DataDog#642)" (DataDog#664) This reverts commit 3f45f6d.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Reverts #642
(Same as #663 but for v1 branch)
This can be problematic for multiple reasons such as producing unexpectedly large quantities of data, and possible security issues. We do not want to provide APIs with unexpected or potentially dangerous behavior.
Thank you for the contribution, @mingrammer, and sorry about needing to revert. I am re-opening #640 so we can revisit this with a more targeted approach.