-
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
[extension/jaegerremotesampling]: Replace Thrift-gen with Proto-gen types for sampling strategies #18485
[extension/jaegerremotesampling]: Replace Thrift-gen with Proto-gen types for sampling strategies #18485
Conversation
Foresight Summary
View More Details⭕ build-and-test-windows workflow has finished in 5 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 22 seconds (1 minute 12 seconds less than main
branch avg.) and finished at 9th 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 23 seconds (1 minute 35 seconds less than main
branch avg.) and finished at 9th 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 3 minutes 18 seconds and finished at 9th Feb, 2023.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
changelog | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
❌ prometheus-compliance-tests workflow has finished in 7 minutes 32 seconds (1 minute 12 seconds less than main
branch avg.) and finished at 9th Feb, 2023. 1 job failed.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
prometheus-compliance-tests | Run make otelcontribcol 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
❌ e2e-tests workflow has finished in 8 minutes 56 seconds (11 minutes 39 seconds less than main
branch avg.) and finished at 9th Feb, 2023. 1 job failed.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
kubernetes-test | Build Collector 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
❌ build-and-test workflow has finished in 27 minutes 56 seconds (30 minutes 27 seconds less than main
branch avg.) and finished at 9th Feb, 2023. 6 jobs failed.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
correctness-metrics | - 🔗 | ✅ 2 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, internal) | - 🔗 | ✅ 561 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, internal) | - 🔗 | ✅ 561 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
correctness-traces | - 🔗 | ✅ 17 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, processor) | - 🔗 | ✅ 1472 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, extension) | - 🔗 | ✅ 546 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, extension) | - 🔗 | ✅ 546 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, processor) | - 🔗 | ✅ 1472 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, receiver-0) | - 🔗 | ✅ 2574 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, receiver-0) | - 🔗 | ✅ 2574 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, other) | Run Unit Tests 🔗 | ✅ 62 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, exporter) | - 🔗 | ✅ 2444 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.19, receiver-1) | - 🔗 | ✅ 1389 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, receiver-1) | - 🔗 | ✅ 1116 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, exporter) | - 🔗 | ✅ 1683 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
unittest-matrix (1.18, other) | - 🔗 | ✅ 62 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
integration-tests | - 🔗 | ✅ 55 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
setup-environment | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
check-codeowners | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
checks | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
build-examples | Build Examples 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint-matrix (receiver-0) | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
check-collector-module-version | - 🔗 | 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 (other) | Lint 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint-matrix (internal) | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
unittest (1.19) | Interpret result 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
unittest (1.18) | Interpret result 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
lint | Interpret result 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
cross-compile | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
windows-msi | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
build-package | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
publish-stable | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
publish-dev | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
publish-check | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
✅ load-tests workflow has finished in 20 minutes 15 seconds (⚠️ 3 minutes 31 seconds more than main
branch avg.) and finished at 9th Feb, 2023.
Job | Failed Steps | Tests | |
---|---|---|---|
loadtest (TestTraceAttributesProcessor) | - 🔗 | ✅ 3 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestIdleMode) | - 🔗 | ✅ 1 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestMetric10kDPS|TestMetricsFromFile) | - 🔗 | ✅ 6 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestTraceNoBackend10kSPS|TestTrace1kSPSWithAttrs) | - 🔗 | ✅ 8 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestMetricResourceProcessor|TestTrace10kSPS) | - 🔗 | ✅ 12 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestTraceBallast1kSPSWithAttrs|TestTraceBallast1kSPSAddAttrs) | - 🔗 | ✅ 10 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
loadtest (TestBallastMemory|TestLog10kDPS) | - 🔗 | ✅ 19 ❌ 0 ⏭ 0 🔗 | See Details |
setup-environment | - 🔗 | N/A | See Details |
*You can configure Foresight comments in your organization settings page.
dbc6a68
to
ae861fc
Compare
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.
In general breaking changes are done through the use of a feature gate first.
- first release: Starting with the gate as an opt-in with a warning of the deprecation for the breaking change,
- second release: changing the gate to be an opt-out and changing the default behaviour to the new one
- third release: finally removing the gate
This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days. |
This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days. |
Closed as inactive. Feel free to reopen if this PR is still being worked on. |
Ups - I thought that was already done. I will look into it. |
This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days. |
724a896
to
ed44c9c
Compare
This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days. |
Signed-off-by: Benedikt Bongartz <[email protected]>
e3d6034
to
b3045aa
Compare
Once @codeboten approves, this is ready to be merged. |
Resolved another conflict |
…_proto-gen Signed-off-by: Benedikt Bongartz <[email protected]>
d76a9bd
to
6468cce
Compare
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.
This is looking really close, just a couple of questions
@@ -72,7 +72,10 @@ func TestEndpointsAreWired(t *testing.T) { | |||
resp.Body.Close() | |||
|
|||
body := string(samplingStrategiesBytes) | |||
assert.Equal(t, `{"strategyType":"PROBABILISTIC"}`, body) |
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.
Has this question been answered?
Signed-off-by: Benedikt Bongartz <[email protected]>
3d48cf7
to
4ea501c
Compare
…_proto-gen Signed-off-by: Benedikt Bongartz <[email protected]>
4ea501c
to
f99ee72
Compare
@codeboten should be fixed. Is there something else missing? :) |
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 @frzifus
I'm trying to use this locally (flipping on and off the feature gate) and I keep seeing the warning message about upcoming deprecation. Does that mean that I'm:
|
@zcross Thanks for reporting this, would you mind opening a separate issue for this? |
@zcross the warning will always be printed. But... 😮💨 Something is defiantly wrong. :/ Adding a ./bin/otelcontribcol_linux_amd64 --config=config.yaml --feature-gates=+extension.jaegerremotesampling.replaceThriftWithProto What wonders me even more. Because in the generated main file, the factories of all existing components are created first and then afterwards the CLI commands are evaluated. otelcol Stacktraceruntime/debug.Stack()
runtime/debug/stack.go:24 +0x5e
runtime/debug.PrintStack()
runtime/debug/stack.go:16 +0x13
go.opentelemetry.io/collector/featuregate.(*Registry).Set(0x7ffdbf16fbf9?, {0x7ffdbf16fbfa?, 0x1229970?}, 0x1?)
go.opentelemetry.io/collector/featuregate@v1.0.0-rcv0014/registry.go:114 +0xb1
go.opentelemetry.io/collector/featuregate.(*flagValue).Set(0xc0001320d8, {0x7ffdbf16fbf9?, 0xc0004bc410?})
go.opentelemetry.io/collector/featuregate@v1.0.0-rcv0014/flag.go:52 +0x76
github.com/spf13/pflag.(*flagValueWrapper).Set(0xf3b6e0?, {0x7ffdbf16fbf9?, 0x10c87ac?})
github.com/spf13/pflag@v1.0.5/golangflag.go:53 +0x22
github.com/spf13/pflag.(*FlagSet).Set(0xc000162500, {0x10c87ac, 0xd}, {0x7ffdbf16fbf9, 0x36})
github.com/spf13/pflag@v1.0.5/flag.go:463 +0xa2
github.com/spf13/pflag.(*FlagSet).Parse.func1(0xf3b6e0?, {0x7ffdbf16fbf9?, 0x7ffdbf16fbeb?})
github.com/spf13/pflag@v1.0.5/flag.go:1138 +0x32
github.com/spf13/pflag.(*FlagSet).parseLongArg(0xc000162500, {0x7ffdbf16fbe9, 0x46}, {0xc000136200, 0x0, 0x0}, 0xc00053fa50)
github.com/spf13/pflag@v1.0.5/flag.go:1000 +0x24f
github.com/spf13/pflag.(*FlagSet).parseArgs(0xc000162500, {0xc0001361f0?, 0xc000004600?, 0xdfa500?}, 0xc000162b00?)
github.com/spf13/pflag@v1.0.5/flag.go:1108 +0x1ae
github.com/spf13/pflag.(*FlagSet).Parse(0xc000162500, {0xc0001361f0, 0x2, 0x2})
github.com/spf13/pflag@v1.0.5/flag.go:1141 +0xd8
github.com/spf13/cobra.(*Command).ParseFlags(0xc000004600, {0xc0001361f0, 0x2, 0x2})
github.com/spf13/cobra@v1.7.0/command.go:1782 +0xd2
github.com/spf13/cobra.(*Command).execute(0xc000004600, {0xc0001361f0, 0x2, 0x2})
github.com/spf13/cobra@v1.7.0/command.go:861 +0x137
github.com/spf13/cobra.(*Command).ExecuteC(0xc000004600)
github.com/spf13/cobra@v1.7.0/command.go:1068 +0x3a5
github.com/spf13/cobra.(*Command).Execute(0xc0004be450?)
github.com/spf13/cobra@v1.7.0/command.go:992 +0x13
main.runInteractive({{0xc0004be450, 0xc0004be4e0, 0xc0004be480, 0xc0004be420, 0xc0004be510}, {{0x10c6d67, 0xb}, {0x10f27a3, 0x33}, {0x10c5f93, ...}}, ...})
go.opentelemetry.io/collector/cmd/otelcorecol/main.go:35 +0x45
main.run(...)
go.opentelemetry.io/collector/cmd/otelcorecol/main_others.go:11
main.main()
go.opentelemetry.io/collector/cmd/otelcorecol/main.go:28 +0x1d8 |
In logs I see this
How do I switch to the new behavior ( My current config is like this: receivers:
jaeger:
protocols:
grpc:
endpoint: 0.0.0.0:14250
thrift_http:
endpoint: 0.0.0.0:14268 |
@davispuh Would you mind filing a separate issue for this? |
Okay I created #35894 |
Description:
Replace Thrift-gen with Proto-gen types for sampling strategies. This change breaks existing clients.
Do we have to take this into account and first inform the users a few releases ahead?
It seems to be a bit more effort to support both formats over a few releases and then deprecate thrift.
wdyt?
Link to tracking Issue:
Closes #18401
Ref #18047
--
cc @jpkrohling