Add APIs to determine if tracer, logger, instruments are enabled

[jack-berg]

Followup to #6497.

Spec PRs open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#4063 and open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#4020 extended the SDK scope config options with corresponding APIs, which can be called to avoid unnecessary computation recording telemetry when the SDK isn't going to do anything with it.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 71.69811% with 15 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 90.59%. Comparing base (9bfb81b) to head (23a008b).

Files	Patch %	Lines
...ics/internal/state/MultiWritableMetricStorage.java	20.00%	3 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...entelemetry/api/incubator/logs/ExtendedLogger.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...y/api/incubator/metrics/ExtendedDoubleCounter.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...try/api/incubator/metrics/ExtendedDoubleGauge.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...api/incubator/metrics/ExtendedDoubleHistogram.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...incubator/metrics/ExtendedDoubleUpDownCounter.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...try/api/incubator/metrics/ExtendedLongCounter.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...metry/api/incubator/metrics/ExtendedLongGauge.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...y/api/incubator/metrics/ExtendedLongHistogram.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...i/incubator/metrics/ExtendedLongUpDownCounter.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
... and 2 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #6502      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     90.63%   90.59%   -0.05%     
- Complexity     6228     6255      +27     
============================================
  Files           679      689      +10     
  Lines         18661    18698      +37     
  Branches       1842     1843       +1     
============================================
+ Hits          16914    16940      +26     
- Misses         1189     1201      +12     
+ Partials        558      557       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[trask]

it looks like there's a mix of boolean isEnabled() and boolean enabled()

[jack-berg]

Good call! Resolved.

[jkwatson]

Is the title of this PR correct? Is this just a stepping stone toward being able to have API disabled via some sort of configuration, per scope?

[jack-berg]

There's already (experimental) SDK config to disable scopes. This adds (experimental) API surface area which allows instrumentation to inspect whether a scope is disabled, and if yes, avoid unnecessary computation in recording instrumentation.

The idea of having easier SDK configuration for disabling these (i.e. file config, or something else) is independent and not addressed by this.

[jkwatson]

There's already (experimental) SDK config to disable scopes. This adds (experimental) API surface area which allows instrumentation to inspect whether a scope is disabled, and if yes, avoid unnecessary computation in recording instrumentation.

The idea of having easier SDK configuration for disabling these (i.e. file config, or something else) is independent and not addressed by this.

So...is the title of this PR incorrect, then?

[jack-berg]

So...is the title of this PR incorrect, then?

I'm not following.. This PR does add an API to check if a particular scope is enabled.

[jkwatson]

So...is the title of this PR incorrect, then?

I'm not following.. This PR does add an API to check if a particular scope is enabled.

So...is the title of this PR incorrect, then?

I'm not following.. This PR does add an API to check if a particular scope is enabled.

It might do that indirectly; what it does is add APIs to see if a given tracer/instrument/logger is enabled. Those can be scope associated, but don't have to be. /shrug

[jack-berg]

It might do that indirectly; what it does is add APIs to see if a given tracer/instrument/logger is enabled. Those can be scope associated, but don't have to be. /shrug

Ahh I see. We're talking past each other on language. I use the phrase "scope" to refer to the concept of tracer / logger / meter collectively, since tracer / logger / meter are the signal-specific terms for scope. Admittedly, its a bit imprecise. I'll update the PR title.

[jkwatson]

It might do that indirectly; what it does is add APIs to see if a given tracer/instrument/logger is enabled. Those can be scope associated, but don't have to be. /shrug

Ahh I see. We're talking past each other on language. I use the phrase "scope" to refer to the concept of tracer / logger / meter collectively, since tracer / logger / meter are the signal-specific terms for scope. Admittedly, its a bit imprecise. I'll update the PR title.

Yep! I like the new PR title better, as I think it will cause less confusion for everybody in the future. Also, "Scope" is used in the Context APIs, which also could lead to confusion.

What API will actually allow users to enable/disable these things, BTW?

[jack-berg]

What API will actually allow users to enable/disable these things, BTW?

An experimental API for this already exists. See ScopeConfiguratorTest, LoggerConfigTest, MeterConfigTest, TracerConfigTest for usage details.

Ergonomics will improve once the API is stabilized.