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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
[service/telemetry] Switch to a factory pattern #10001
[service/telemetry] Switch to a factory pattern #10001
Changes from all commits
8c10d1b
01d4ff1
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
To highlight the point above, I don't like making 2 calls to
NewFactory
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.
component.Factory
would feel a little more uniform, though it's not clear to me how much a telemetry Factory really resembles a component factory. In particular, components have types, as where I don't know whether a telemetry factory will have a type.I think what's here is alright for now, I just wanted to start the discussion around this point.
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 I'd prefer not to depend on anything from
component
in here, since this struct this factory builds is not a component.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.
Agreed on not having a dependency on
component
, I think we'd want to consider what commonalities the two have and move all of those things into a shared package.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 feel like the answer to that is no (but API users are still free to do that by building their own factory that glues the two together). The type could be useful for having a consistent way to refer to what telemetry factory you used in logs/telemetry.
Probably also no? You should be able to eventually configure this through the builder IMO, but after that the
service::telemetry
config section should only support the config from your telemetry factory.