Raygun Feature Request

When you create an application in Raygun, it seems like you are expected to create one application per environment - eg one for development, one for staging, and one for UAT and another for production. You would then have 4 different API keys.

When sending the error to Raygun, could an (optional) environment specific attribute be added? This would allow you to drill down into just the environment you care about at the time. Coupled with the version specific filter, this would be a nice addition.

I'm ok with setting up multiple applications but I'd like to be able to designate some of them as "non-production". these "non-production" applications would have very low retention rates, very low error storage limits and not count against the application limit of the pricing plan (ie. free-ish).

I'm an ex-airbrake user, and find the lack of separation of environments frustrating. Here's the user experience for the two platforms, the same error in two different environments. Airbrake:

And Raygun:

I don't particularly want to check four dashboards (for four environments).

+1. Creating separate apps is not ideal.

+1 too

+1 this is needed for standard dev practices

+1 : becomes super useful when you have multiple WIP enviroments + staging + production.

I'm fine with creating multiple applications, and I think I prefer this for ease of use for other workflows (splitting errors in production vs. errors on staging vs. errors on UAT etc.)

This is also easier to setup for people integrating Raygun into their app - e.g. you don't want another mandatory parameter, unless you make it part of the overall setup process ("Insert your API key here" and "Insert your environment name here")

However, perhaps an alternative would be to group applications together - so I create a "Website" group, with "Website | Production", "Website | UAT", "Website | Staging", "Website | Integration Testing" etc. applications inside it.

This could also mean you can create a special "group" dashboard that aggregates all errors from all applications as an added feature.

What are people's thoughts on that?

Madman,

Thanks for the suggestion about the app grouping - we'll be taking it into consideration. Conveniently, as of right now we're rolling out the beta of a global dashboard feature to our users, which does include an aggregate view of all applications, as well as a view which presents all errors grouped by application. This may go some way towards enhancing the ability to manage errors across environments. I have enabled this for your account now, and if any other Raygun users see this and want it enabled immediately please contact us and we'll switch it on.

To respond to MadMan's concern, I don't thing a mandatory parameter is necessary. If you don't want to include an environment, don't include one. It can be as simple as an optional parameter or even a tag that you can filter by. If the tag exists, you can filter by it, if not, no problem.

Having just started evaluating RayGun myself, immediately hit this issue. Yes please ++++1.

+1

+111111111

The screen shot Matthew posted of how Airbrake handles this issue is very close to what I want. I'd also like to be able to color-code environments (e.g. QA = yelow, Prod = red).

+1

While this would be great, I just add a tag for the environment. E.g. dev, qa, prod.

+1 This is absurd that this is not in place already

Hey John-Daniel,

With the global dashboard now, this makes a lot more sense. I'd still like app grouping (I look after multiple envs of multiple apps, so my dashboard is a bit all over the place, ideally I could have a group of apps per website that I develop on).

One query - the first comment in this thread mentions a way of denoting certain apps as being 'non-production' - with suitably low retention rates, and no cost for these applications. I think this could be a good idea - it means you don't have to worry about people sending you messages as you mention, and you don't have to worry about checking these accounts to see if they're actually abusing the system. This could be as simple as a checkbox on the app creation screen.

That should be a bit easier to control - retention of 30days maximum, with a 1,000 error count limit per month, or something like that? Either drop old errors, or refuse to store new ones (with appropriate messaging, and email notifications).

Anyway, just my 2c :)

Cheers, Matt.

So I sent an email requesting additional seats for our dev versions of our apps, but no one has responded to the request for over a week. I assume the email just got lost and not purposely ignored. If someone would like to contact me that would be great.

Also I need "naive message-based grouping" enabled, but I have just made that request in another thread. Hopefully that or this will be seen soon. If I can't resolve the erroneous grouping then none of this will matter. At this point I'd rather risk having too many groups than not enough as right now too many errors are being grouped and essentially hidden from view since it is not correct for our environment.

Is this still not being considered?

We are an Enterprise customer and have been using the recommended, "create apps for all environments" approach for almost a year now. At this point, I can definitively tell you that this is not manageable at scale. Sure, there is the global dashboard, but you can only have a single personal filter applied at a time. So If I want to see all of my dev env apps, I need to uncheck all others and check the ones I want. I then have to repeat that for each platform and environment...the same goes for every member of my 30+ person team. This really can't be the best way to go about this.

Environments with separate settings and notifications per app would really solve some of this pain. Especially if we could just quickly switch between environments on the global dashboard. Even better would be the ability to save, create, and share views on the global dashboard to manage this even further.

Am I way off here? If so, what are me and my team missing on how to manage this type of workflow?

@sirkirby
IMO you're not off at all, I really think this is a must-have.

+1

I appreciate you want to keep the solution usable. And adding environment tag seems to be something you dont want. If you are suggesting you will support this feature with multiple applications and you have suggested you dont want to make peple pay for pre prod apps . (Which i agree with). Could you possibly provide a simple way to add a pre production app which doesnt take an app license when set up. Appreciate it would have limited erorr logginglimits etc . But that would help , i think. Its a convenience thing. This is a sticking point for us . We are a software deve;lopment consultancy and making a reccomendation for raygun tends to get pushed out when this issue / question comes up. And it always comes up.