Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use the IMeterFactory approach #7087

Open
wants to merge 81 commits into
base: otel/critical-time
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mauroservienti
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

…n receiving a message (#7079)

* Moves metrics and traces tests in dedicated folders for clarity

* Adds an extension to publish and send options to start a new trace when receiving the published or sent message

* add xmldocs

* approval file

* move

* rename, and then dots and spaces, because they matter!

* approval files

* Change the default behavior for publishes to always break the trace
Provide an API to continue the trace
Use a feature with behaviors to control this behavior

* Move the start/continue trace tests to files based on message operation (send/publish)

* Approve API changes

* Fix a test

* this is handled in the publish behavior instead

* revert test change

---------

Co-authored-by: SzymonPobiega <[email protected]>
@mauroservienti mauroservienti self-assigned this Jun 25, 2024
@mauroservienti mauroservienti changed the base branch from master to otel/critical-time June 25, 2024 19:42

class MessagingMetricsMeters
{
public MessagingMetricsMeters(IMeterFactory meterFactory)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we keep this approach can we rename this to MessagingMetrics? Or MessagingMeters? I don't have a strong preference as long as it doesn't combine both namings

danielmarbach and others added 2 commits June 26, 2024 11:34
…taRegistry (#7086)

* Extract old implementation with tests that fail

* New implementation that passes the tests

* Use the new parser

* Root namespace

* Simplify used types

* And now without spelling errors

* Array edge cases to verify whether the parsing is robust enough

---------

Co-authored-by: danielmarbach <[email protected]>
…endpoint name tags (#7071)

Add specific meters for recoverability actions with message type and endpoint name tags

Co-authored-by: Laila Bougria <[email protected]>
Comment on lines 18 to 19
string queueNameBase,
string endpointDiscriminator)
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These two parameters sound off. They are needed down below to initialize default tags in the IncomingPipelineMetricTags, but still 🤷

danielmarbach and others added 21 commits July 1, 2024 18:47
…e Interfaces (#7081)

* Add a test to verify the messages referencing core are scanned

* Failing test for messages that reference message interfaces

* Unify in one test due avoid assembly loading issues

* Cleanup

* AssemblyScanner should scan assemblies that reference the message interfaces assembly to make sure messages using those interfaces can be discovered and do not act like unobtrusive messages

* Extract into method with a huge comment and inline hints

* Add a type forwarding test as a safety net

* Update src/NServiceBus.Core.Tests/AssemblyScanner/When_using_type_forwarding.cs

Co-authored-by: Phil Bastian <[email protected]>

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Brandon Ording <[email protected]>

* string.Equals

Co-authored-by: Brandon Ording <[email protected]>

---------

Co-authored-by: danielmarbach <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Phil Bastian <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Brandon Ording <[email protected]>
…ied an increase in the version, that still remains 0.x since the whole metrics module is in experimental state.
…- this change was initially required by the code in HandlingMetricsFactory.
@SzymonPobiega SzymonPobiega marked this pull request as ready for review July 4, 2024 12:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants