-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
[processor/spanmetricsprocessor] Allow set metrics namespace #18199
Conversation
|
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.
Thanks for the contribution, it looks good, just a comment about the test assertion.
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 am looking forward on this change as well 🥇 Thanks @Cluas ! |
metricstransform: |
@dashpole PTAL |
Thanks for addressing this issue! However, It seems that I am wondering whether we shall provide the ability to set histogram and counter names explicitly via configuration instead of only providing a prefix? cc: @dashpole @gouthamve @albertteoh |
I agree that the OTLP metric should be
I like the idea, but I am also a little conflicted. This means if we are generating 5 different metrics, we'll need to set 5 different names? A prefix makes it easier. However if we know that we will only export a couple of metrics from this processor, maybe explicit naming makes sense. |
Yes, we should drop
For now, it is only 2. Right, maybe the prefix makes more sense. Also, shall we use |
I would use |
@gouthamve @kovrus Thank you both for your review suggestions! |
@Cluas thanks! Do you mind opening a separate PR with the breaking renaming change ( |
ok, I'll remove this change first and submit a separate PR change |
I like the idea of dropping Re: join on When we do make these changes, I think we'd need to add clear instructions to include the |
Foresight Summary
View More Details⭕ build-and-test-windows workflow has finished in 6 seconds (40 minutes 44 seconds less than
|
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
windows-unittest-matrix | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
windows-unittest | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
✅ check-links workflow has finished in 1 minute 21 seconds (1 minute 14 seconds less than main
branch avg.) and finished at 14th Feb, 2023.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
changed files | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
check-links | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
✅ telemetrygen workflow has finished in 1 minute 49 seconds (1 minute 18 seconds less than main
branch avg.) and finished at 14th Feb, 2023.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
publish-latest | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
build-dev | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
publish-stable | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
✅ changelog workflow has finished in 2 minutes 20 seconds (1 minute 23 seconds less than main
branch avg.) and finished at 14th Feb, 2023.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
changelog | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
✅ prometheus-compliance-tests workflow has finished in 12 minutes 21 seconds (⚠️ 3 minutes 32 seconds more than main
branch avg.) and finished at 14th Feb, 2023.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
prometheus-compliance-tests | - 🔗 | ✅ 21 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
❌ build-and-test workflow has finished in 33 minutes 45 seconds (31 minutes 53 seconds less than main
branch avg.) and finished at 14th Feb, 2023. 3 jobs failed. There are 6 test failures.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
correctness-metrics | - 🔗 | ✅ 2 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
correctness-traces | - 🔗 | ✅ 17 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, extension) | - 🔗 | ✅ 537 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, extension) | - 🔗 | ✅ 537 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, internal) | - 🔗 | ✅ 561 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, internal) | - 🔗 | ✅ 561 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, processor) | Run Unit Tests 🔗 | ✅ 1123 ❌ 6 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, receiver-0) | - 🔗 | ✅ 743 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, receiver-0) | - 🔗 | ✅ 365 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, receiver-1) | - 🔗 | ✅ 297 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, receiver-1) | - 🔗 | ✅ 333 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, other) | - 🔗 | ✅ 0 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, exporter) | - 🔗 | ✅ 1036 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, other) | - 🔗 | ✅ 0 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, processor) | - 🔗 | ✅ 800 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, exporter) | - 🔗 | ✅ 1547 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
integration-tests | - 🔗 | ✅ 55 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
setup-environment | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
check-codeowners | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
check-collector-module-version | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
checks | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
build-examples | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint-matrix (receiver-0) | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint-matrix (receiver-1) | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint-matrix (processor) | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint-matrix (exporter) | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint-matrix (extension) | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint-matrix (internal) | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint-matrix (other) | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
unittest (1.19) | Interpret result 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
unittest (1.18) | Interpret result 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
cross-compile | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
windows-msi | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
build-package | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
publish-check | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
publish-stable | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
publish-dev | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
✅ e2e-tests workflow has finished in 15 minutes 10 seconds and finished at 14th Feb, 2023.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
kubernetes-test | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
❌ load-tests workflow has finished in 25 minutes 50 seconds (⚠️ 8 minutes 48 seconds more than main
branch avg.) and finished at 14th Feb, 2023. 1 job failed. There are 2 test failures.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
loadtest (TestIdleMode) | - 🔗 | ✅ 1 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestTraceAttributesProcessor) | - 🔗 | ✅ 3 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestMetric10kDPS|TestMetricsFromFile) | - 🔗 | ✅ 6 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestMetricResourceProcessor|TestTrace10kSPS) | - 🔗 | ✅ 12 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestTraceNoBackend10kSPS|TestTrace1kSPSWithAttrs) | - 🔗 | ✅ 8 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestTraceBallast1kSPSWithAttrs|TestTraceBallast1kSPSAddAttrs) | - 🔗 | ✅ 10 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestBallastMemory|TestLog10kDPS) | Loadtest 🔗 | ✅ 17 ❌ 2 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
setup-environment | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
*You can configure Foresight comments in your organization settings page.
Let's wait till #18535 is merged and open a pr with dropping |
So let's do that on the new
|
Description:
The currently generated metric name differs from the description in the Tempo APM table document, such as
calls_total
vstraces_spanmetrics_calls_total
. Why don't we simply open up the setting of the namespace on the processor side, so that I can easily integrate with the Tempo APM table?so we can just do this:
Link to tracking Issue:
Testing:
Documentation: