Updated Zipkin spec for remoteEndpoint mapping. #534
Closed
Conversation
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
CodeBlanch
requested review from
SergeyKanzhelev,
arminru,
bogdandrutu,
c24t,
carlosalberto,
iredelmeier,
jmacd,
reyang,
tedsuo,
tigrannajaryan and
yurishkuro
as code owners
Oberon00
reviewed
Mar 30, 2020
specification/exporter-zipkin.md
Outdated
| |3|http.host|Commonly used address attribute for Http Spans.| | ||
| |3|db.instance|Commonly used address attribute for DB Spans.| | ||
|
|
||
| Lowest priority match should be selected. In the event that multiple hits occur at the same priority level (Ex: `net.peer.name` & `peer.service` are both specified), take the value from the first attribute matched. `net.peer.ip` can be used by itself as remote endpoint but should be combined with `net.peer.port` if it is also present. |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"Lowest priority match should be selected." So the lowest priority match has the highest priority? 😕
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sigh :) For whatever reason, it doesn't bug me. Think about a priority 1 issue vs a priority 5? Sometimes lower is more urgent. But I'm happy to change it to reduce confusion. How about "rank" instead?
* SpanContext.IsRemote is false on remote children The IsRemote flag should be false on children of remote spans, as the span itself was created locally. * Update specification/api-tracing.md Otherwise one could interpret this as "The child span's IsRemote flag must always be false if the parent used to be remote, even after the child was propagated.". Co-Authored-By: Armin Ruech <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Bogdan Drutu <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Bogdan Drutu <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Hsu <[email protected]>
* sdk-tracing: Fix section hierarchy The sdk-tracing spec grouped everything but sampling under "Tracer creation". * Fix lint Co-authored-by: Bogdan Drutu <[email protected]>
* Scrub LabelSet references * Update metrics API TOC * Remove more references to "label sets" * Lint * Update go examples for @jmacd's comments * Update specification/metrics/api-user.md Co-Authored-By: Armin Ruech <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Bogdan Drutu <[email protected]>
I'm not sure what this should have to do with vendors, according to the examples, this would be the actual system names themselves. Otherwise the vendor for kafka would probably be "Apache", for example.
The current milestone document is dated and inaccurate as well as redundant in purpose to the newly created https://opentelemetry.io/project-status/. This updates the README to link to the actively updated and managed GitHub milestones page as well as the opentelemetry.io project status page.
Signed-off-by: Bogdan Drutu <[email protected]>
* Cleanup R/W span spec. * Wording.
* Add logs overview The overview.md is the summarized version of ideas that were discussed multiple times in meetings or in Gitter channels. Note that the document is written as if we already have implemented all desirable functionality, thus there are multiple "link TBD" entries in the document. We will add the links as the implementations are done. * Address PR comments * Add diagrams * Address PR comments.
* Specify the initial propagators requirements. * Do not require the SDK to include the B3 protocol. * Update specification/trace/api.md Co-authored-by: Reiley Yang <[email protected]> * Update specification/correlationcontext/api.md Co-authored-by: Reiley Yang <[email protected]> * Remove the CorrelationContext propagator requirement. * Make TraceContext optional in the API. * Update the propagators location. * Fix typo. Co-authored-by: Reiley Yang <[email protected]>
…issues (open-telemetry#772) Signed-off-by: Bogdan Drutu <[email protected]>
anuraaga
reviewed
Aug 11, 2020
specification/exporter-zipkin.md
Outdated
| |Priority|Attribute Name|Reason| | ||
| |---|---|---| | ||
| |1|net.peer.name|[OpenTelemetry adopted attribute for remote hostname, or similar.](./data-span-general.md#general-network-connection-attributes)| | ||
| |1|peer.service|Remote service name defined in OpenTracing specification.| |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
peer.service was added to OpenTelemetry with this use case in mind, I think we can use it as the highest priority.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh actually I noticed some values have same priority - what's the decision mechanism within a priority?
Member
Author
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
32 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.
See open-telemetry/opentelemetry-dotnet#483.
Recreated PR (old one was #474) to fix CLA issue.