fix(weblog/python-flask): missing f in f-string

[Eldolfin]

Motivation

Changes

Workflow

1. ⚠️ Create your PR as draft ⚠️
2. Work on you PR until the CI passes
3. Mark it as ready for review
   • Test logic is modified? -> Get a review from RFC owner.
   • Framework is modified, or non obvious usage of it -> get a review from R&P team

🚀 Once your PR is reviewed and the CI green, you can merge it!

🛟 #apm-shared-testing 🛟

Reviewer checklist

• Anything but tests/ or manifests/ is modified ? I have the approval from R&P team
• A docker base image is modified?
  • the relevant build-XXX-image label is present
• A scenario is added, removed or renamed?
  • Get a review from R&P team

[github-actions]

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

utils/build/docker/python/flask/app.py                                  @DataDog/apm-python @DataDog/asm-python @DataDog/system-tests-core

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: e0c616f083

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

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".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Avoid exhausting SQL cursor before composing response

The new f-string log call iterates cursor once (len(list(cursor))) before the response is built, so in any case where the query succeeds and returns rows, the subsequent len(list(cursor)) in the return path will always be 0 because the cursor has already been consumed. This changes endpoint behavior from reporting actual row count to always reporting zero; compute the count once and reuse it for both log and response.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.