[Logging.EventSource] Add trace correlation fields #103655
Conversation
dotnet-policy-service
bot
added
the
community-contribution
src/libraries/Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.EventSource/src/LoggingEventSource.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/libraries/Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.EventSource/src/LoggingEventSource.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/libraries/Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.EventSource/src/EventSourceLogger.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| string? activityTraceId; | ||
| string? activitySpanId; | ||
| string? activityTraceFlags; | ||
| if (activity != null && activity.IdFormat == ActivityIdFormat.W3C) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are we sure we don't want support non W3C cases too?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well for non-W3C TraceId is going to spit out 00000000000000000000000000000000 and SpanId is going to spit out 0000000000000000. We could just push Activity.Id into the events which would include W3C, Hierarchical, and (presumably) anything added in the future. BUT. Accessing Activity.Id will force an allocation in the process being monitored. And it will force consumers to have to inspect the value and understand the possible formats/differences. Probably also the consumers will have to chop up the Id into the individual components. In my world of OTel I don't need hierarchical but if you feel there is a need and the tradeoffs are OK, I'm happy to switch it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have been supporting the Hierarchical cases with external logger scopes.
Also, will it make sense to add the parent Id to the event as we do in scopes?
CC @noahfalk if he has more insight if we should ignore the Hierarchical cases or not.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just FYI the reason I went with ActivityTraceId, ActivitySpanId, and ActivityTraceFlags is because those are the only things defined on the OTel Logs Data Model for correlation: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/main/specification/logs/data-model.md#log-and-event-record-definition
Happy to add other things, but from OTel perspective they aren't required.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd be fine omitting support for hierarichal. Worst case I forsee is we get feedback that someone wants Hierarichal support, we decide the scenario in the request is important and then we add that too in a future release. I think that has a pretty low chance of happening.
src/libraries/Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.EventSource/tests/EventSourceLoggerTest.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…-correlationfields
|
@CodeBlanch I am seeing test failure in https://helixre107v0xdcypoyl9e7f.blob.core.windows.net/dotnet-runtime-refs-pull-103655-merge-e2f8c48b4c15440fa9/Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.EventSource.Tests/1/console.3e8ced58.log?helixlogtype=result which can be related. |
* Add trace correlation fields to Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.EventSource. * Code review. * Code review. * Test fix.
Fixes #76718
Changes
ActivityTraceId,ActivitySpanId, andActivityTraceFlagsfromActivity.Currentto log events/cc @noahfalk @tarekgh