Make it more obvious how to do propagation #27351
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks for your pull request! The title of your pull request does not follow our editorial rules. Could you have a look?
|
pilhuhn
changed the title
brunobat
approved these changes
Aug 18, 2022
pilhuhn
force-pushed
the
reword_trace_propagation
branch
from
dd09032 to
eb14ee5
Compare
|
The OpenTelemetry Smallrye example should be revisited. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The example itself is misleading as one would not want to
Message.addMetadata(<example code>), as in this case theTracingMetadatawould be wrapped inside aMetadataobject, which does not allow to find it on incoming messages.TODO: I am not convinced that the
.withPrevious()is correct, as in my case https://itnext.io/distributed-tracing-with-quarkus-python-open-telemetry-and-jaeger-part-3-79137543b2c5 it would not take the current traceId, which we just got from the incoming message, but rather use a different one that then breaks the continuation (and effectively creates two separate traces)@brunobat