[Discover][Traces] Fix processed OTel waterfall flyout#224548
Merged
iblancof merged 3 commits intoelastic:mainfrom Jun 19, 2025
Merged
[Discover][Traces] Fix processed OTel waterfall flyout#224548iblancof merged 3 commits intoelastic:mainfrom
iblancof merged 3 commits intoelastic:mainfrom
Conversation
iblancof
added
release_note:skip
Contributor
|
Pinging @elastic/obs-ux-infra_services-team (Team:obs-ux-infra_services) |
rmyz
reviewed
Jun 19, 2025
Comment on lines
+12
to
+14
| export const isSpanHit = (hit: DataTableRecord | null): boolean => { | ||
| return !!hit?.flattened[PARENT_ID_FIELD] && !hit?.flattened[TRANSACTION_NAME_FIELD]; | ||
| }; |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe this is a dumb question, but since unprocessed OTel data doesn't have a transaction field (afaik), will this work?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think this will work anyway with unprocessed OTEL data yet, at least looking at the code, since it is querying for transactions. I think that would be best tackled as a separate PR/step.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the specifics for non-processed OTel data compatibility are being handled in a separate issue, but I think we’ll likely end up with something similar to what you, @Bluefinger, did in this PR, using a combination of processor.event and kind.
Contributor
Author
rmyz
approved these changes
Jun 19, 2025
Bluefinger
approved these changes
Jun 19, 2025
Contributor
|
Starting backport for target branches: 8.19 https://github.com/elastic/kibana/actions/runs/15758553653 |
Contributor
💚 Build Succeeded
Metrics [docs]Module Count
Async chunks
cc @iblancof |
kibanamachine
pushed a commit
to kibanamachine/kibana
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 19, 2025
## Summary Relates to elastic#208707 While reviewing the Traces in Discover feature, we noticed a couple of issues affecting processed OTel data in the waterfall flyout: - The data wasn’t properly formatted because we were pulling it directly from `_source`, which meant the UI wasn’t receiving the processed version. Now we're using `fields` the same way it's used in Discover. - The logic used to set the flyout title (to determine whether the document was a span or a transaction) relied entirely on the presence of `parent.id`. However, since transactions can also be children of other transactions, we’ve added an extra check using `transaction.name` (spans reference the parent transaction via `transaction.id`) to ensure we're correctly identifying spans. ||Discover|Transaction|Span| |-|-|-|-| |Before|||| |After|Same than before.||| (cherry picked from commit e0a4b63)
Contributor
💚 All backports created successfully
Note: Successful backport PRs will be merged automatically after passing CI. Questions ?Please refer to the Backport tool documentation |
7 tasks
kibanamachine
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 20, 2025
… (#224574) # Backport This will backport the following commits from `main` to `8.19`: - [[Discover][Traces] Fix processed OTel waterfall flyout (#224548)](#224548) <!--- Backport version: 9.6.6 --> ### Questions ? Please refer to the [Backport tool documentation](https://github.com/sorenlouv/backport) <!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Irene Blanco","email":"irene.blanco@elastic.co"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2025-06-19T13:03:56Z","message":"[Discover][Traces] Fix processed OTel waterfall flyout (#224548)\n\n## Summary\n\nRelates to https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/208707\n\n\nWhile reviewing the Traces in Discover feature, we noticed a couple of\nissues affecting processed OTel data in the waterfall flyout:\n\n- The data wasn’t properly formatted because we were pulling it directly\nfrom `_source`, which meant the UI wasn’t receiving the processed\nversion. Now we're using `fields` the same way it's used in Discover.\n- The logic used to set the flyout title (to determine whether the\ndocument was a span or a transaction) relied entirely on the presence of\n`parent.id`. However, since transactions can also be children of other\ntransactions, we’ve added an extra check using `transaction.name` (spans\nreference the parent transaction via `transaction.id`) to ensure we're\ncorrectly identifying spans.\n\n||Discover|Transaction|Span|\n|-|-|-|-|\n|Before||||\n|After|Same than before.|||","sha":"e0a4b63a98401971dc512e2ea370388502f12f4a","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.1.0$":"main","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:skip","Team:obs-ux-infra_services","backport:version","v9.1.0","v8.19.0"],"title":"[Discover][Traces] Fix processed OTel waterfall flyout","number":224548,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/224548","mergeCommit":{"message":"[Discover][Traces] Fix processed OTel waterfall flyout (#224548)\n\n## Summary\n\nRelates to https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/208707\n\n\nWhile reviewing the Traces in Discover feature, we noticed a couple of\nissues affecting processed OTel data in the waterfall flyout:\n\n- The data wasn’t properly formatted because we were pulling it directly\nfrom `_source`, which meant the UI wasn’t receiving the processed\nversion. Now we're using `fields` the same way it's used in Discover.\n- The logic used to set the flyout title (to determine whether the\ndocument was a span or a transaction) relied entirely on the presence of\n`parent.id`. However, since transactions can also be children of other\ntransactions, we’ve added an extra check using `transaction.name` (spans\nreference the parent transaction via `transaction.id`) to ensure we're\ncorrectly identifying spans.\n\n||Discover|Transaction|Span|\n|-|-|-|-|\n|Before||||\n|After|Same than before.|||","sha":"e0a4b63a98401971dc512e2ea370388502f12f4a"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["8.19"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"main","label":"v9.1.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.1.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/224548","number":224548,"mergeCommit":{"message":"[Discover][Traces] Fix processed OTel waterfall flyout (#224548)\n\n## Summary\n\nRelates to https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/208707\n\n\nWhile reviewing the Traces in Discover feature, we noticed a couple of\nissues affecting processed OTel data in the waterfall flyout:\n\n- The data wasn’t properly formatted because we were pulling it directly\nfrom `_source`, which meant the UI wasn’t receiving the processed\nversion. Now we're using `fields` the same way it's used in Discover.\n- The logic used to set the flyout title (to determine whether the\ndocument was a span or a transaction) relied entirely on the presence of\n`parent.id`. However, since transactions can also be children of other\ntransactions, we’ve added an extra check using `transaction.name` (spans\nreference the parent transaction via `transaction.id`) to ensure we're\ncorrectly identifying spans.\n\n||Discover|Transaction|Span|\n|-|-|-|-|\n|Before||||\n|After|Same than before.|||","sha":"e0a4b63a98401971dc512e2ea370388502f12f4a"}},{"branch":"8.19","label":"v8.19.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}] BACKPORT--> Co-authored-by: Irene Blanco <irene.blanco@elastic.co>
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
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.
Summary
Relates to #208707
While reviewing the Traces in Discover feature, we noticed a couple of issues affecting processed OTel data in the waterfall flyout:
_source, which meant the UI wasn’t receiving the processed version. Now we're usingfieldsthe same way it's used in Discover.parent.id. However, since transactions can also be children of other transactions, we’ve added an extra check usingtransaction.name(spans reference the parent transaction viatransaction.id) to ensure we're correctly identifying spans.