-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 893
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
AWS SDK common and dynamodb conventions #1422
Conversation
type: number | ||
brief: "The value of the `ProvisionedThroughput.WriteCapacityUnits` request parameter." | ||
examples: | ||
- 1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think these are supposed to be double
, but the generator only supports number
I think, and the examples have to be integer.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
CC @thisthat I somehow thought this was already fixed, but open-telemetry/build-tools#13 is still open, so I may be mistaken.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have created open-telemetry/build-tools#30 :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#1550 bumps the semconvgen reference to v0.3.0 which includes this change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
Co-authored-by: William Armiros <[email protected]>
|---|---|---|---|---| | ||
| [`db.name`](../database.md) | string | The value of the TableName request parameter. [1] | `customers`; `main` | No | | ||
|
||
**[1]:** In some SQL databases, the database name to be used is called "schema name". |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Unfortunately somthing like note: ''
didn't work to override this to remove it (we already have a clearer Description
)
Can anyone take another look at this? Thanks! |
Co-authored-by: Nikita Salnikov-Tarnovski <[email protected]>
I don't believe I have any action items currently - can anyone give this another look? Thanks! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if it would be more helpful to make Dynamodb a db
convention instead of / in addition to aws
one.
You would probably use fields such as db.system=dynamodb
(which is already a specified value by the way) and db.operation
instead of/in addition to aws.operation
.
…ry-specification into aws-sdk-conventions
Ok updated to new number style |
If it gets on average as long as a stacktrace, we are cool, I think. What's your own impression on this @anuraaga ? |
@carlosalberto I think they'd be about the size of a typical web server stack trace in Java. An even closer reference is probably MySQL EXPLAIN query - things like the index stats and collection metrics are very similar to what an EXPLAIN query would return so the size is sort of in the same range (meaning the more indexes, the more potential output too) |
Trusting @anuraaga expertise, merging it, thanks! EDIT: Actually, we need a CHANGELOG entry, please ;) |
…ication into aws-sdk-conventions
…ry-specification into aws-sdk-conventions
Thanks @carlosalberto - added changelog |
…ication into aws-sdk-conventions
@arminru Thanks, updated |
@arminru I went ahead and moved AWS Lambda into the new section on README it seems more consistent (and hoping for more from various cross-language instrumentations!) |
specification/trace/semantic_conventions/instrumentation/aws-sdk.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
specification/trace/semantic_conventions/instrumentation/aws-sdk.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <[email protected]>
…ry-specification into aws-sdk-conventions
@arminru Is this ready to go? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@arminru Is this ready to go?
@carlosalberto Just a minor concern left that's not addressed but isn't blocking and could also be done afterwards. Feel free to merge it.
specification/trace/semantic_conventions/instrumentation/aws-sdk.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: William Armiros <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Nikita Salnikov-Tarnovski <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <[email protected]>
Fixes #968 (by being the first instrumentation-specific instrumentation)
Changes
This is a reopening of #1095 - towards the end of the year things got busy and I wasn't able to continue on it, but now that we are implementing AWS SDK instrumentation in various languages, we could use some conventions to base them off of.
This defines semantic attributes for instrumentation of the AWS SDK. We have instrumentation in several languages and they fill in some traditional semantic fields with varying coverage. AWS has also identified fields in request / response that are valuable for monitoring and we think this is a good list, though will naturally grow more, of attributes to get meaningful information from AWS API calls without the problems of copying the entire request/response.