Open oysteinthoensisjord opened 8 months ago
Do we have any updates on this? I faced this issue too with 1.27.1 Elastic.Apm.Azure.Functions version
I'm also experiencing this issue on .NET 8 with 1.28.5 Elastic.Apm.Azure.Functions, so I'm guessing its not going to be fixed soon. I'm surprised more aren't running into this. @oysteinthoensisjord or @SparkenV, did you folks ever find solutions for this? Or do we have to omit APM tracking for HTTP triggers now?
The only way I found to add APM to Http triggered functions was to "downgrade" the function to not use the "Microsoft.Azure.Functions.Worker.Extensions.Http.AspNetCore"-package. This makes it possible to have APM-tracking. The downside is, of course, that we cannot make use of the functionality provided by the extension package.
APM Agent version
Elastic.Apm.Azure.Functions version 1.26.0
Environment
Operating system and version: At least Windows, but I guess this isn't OS spesific.. .NET Framework/Core name and version Dotnet 8, Azure Functions
Describe the bug
Using the APM package for a HTTP Triggered Azure Function fails when the Azure Function uses the 'Microsoft.Azure.Functions.Worker.Extensions.Http.AspNetCore' integration. This integration seems to be the default when creating a HTTP Triggerend function app in Visual Studio as well.
When triggering the function, the APM Middleware throws an
System.UriFormatException
. The exception is thrown in the methodElastic.Apm.Azure.Functions.ApmMiddleware.GetTriggerSpecificData
.To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
Expected behavior
The APM integration for Azure Functions should support the default behaviour implemented by Microsofts own templates.