docs: for setting up otel demo app and sending data to signoz

[Elizabeth-Mathew1]

Summary

Related Issues / PR's

Screenshots

NA

Affected Areas and Manually Tested Areas

---

Important

Adds documentation for setting up OpenTelemetry Demo App with SigNoz using Docker, Kubernetes, and cloud deployments.

• New Documentation:
  • Adds otel-demo-docs.md for setting up OpenTelemetry Demo App with SigNoz.
  • Covers deployment with Docker, Kubernetes (Helm), and SigNoz Cloud.
• Configuration:
  • Details modifying otelcol-config-extras.yml for Docker and cloud setups.
  • Provides values.yaml configuration for Kubernetes Helm deployment.
• Monitoring:
  • Instructions for accessing SigNoz UI to verify telemetry data reception.
• Misc:
  • Includes prerequisites and step-by-step setup instructions.
  • Notes on configuration merging behavior and potential errors.

^{This description was created by for 8a9502d. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[ellipsis-dev]

❌ Changes requested. Reviewed everything up to 8a9502d in 3 minutes and 0 seconds

More details

• Looked at 314 lines of code in 1 files
• Skipped 4 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 8 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. docs/otel-demo/otel-demo-docs.md:78

• Draft comment:
  Typo: use 'its UI' instead of 'it's UI'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
  While this is a valid grammatical correction, the review rules emphasize focusing on code changes and logic rather than documentation typos. The rules don't explicitly mention handling grammar in documentation, but they emphasize focusing on substantive issues rather than minor corrections.
  The comment is technically correct, but may be too minor to warrant a PR comment. Documentation readability could be considered important enough to fix.
  However, the rules emphasize focusing on substantive issues that affect functionality and code quality. Grammar fixes in documentation, while nice to have, don't align with the core review priorities.
  The comment should be deleted as it focuses on a minor documentation grammar issue rather than substantive code or functionality concerns.

2. docs/otel-demo/otel-demo-docs.md:214

• Draft comment:
  Typo: 'frontent-proxy' should be 'frontend-proxy'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
  While this is a real typo, the review rules emphasize focusing on substantive issues and avoiding purely informative comments. Typo fixes, while helpful, are not critical to the functionality or understanding of the documentation. The meaning is still clear despite the typo.
  The typo is real and fixing it would improve documentation quality. Documentation accuracy could be considered important for user experience.
  However, the review rules explicitly state to avoid making purely informative comments and to focus on issues that require code changes. This is a minor documentation typo that doesn't impact functionality.
  Based on the review rules emphasizing substantive issues over minor corrections, this typo comment should be removed despite being accurate.

3. docs/otel-demo/otel-demo-docs.md:62

• Draft comment:
  Typo: 'frontent-proxy' should be 'frontend-proxy'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Marked as duplicate.

4. docs/otel-demo/otel-demo-docs.md:62

• Draft comment:
  Typo: 'frontent-proxy service' should be 'frontend-proxy service'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Marked as duplicate.

5. docs/otel-demo/otel-demo-docs.md:80

• Draft comment:
  Typo: "Signoz exposes it's UI" should use the correct possessive form, i.e., "SigNoz exposes its UI".
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50%
  While this is technically correct - "its" is the possessive form and "it's" means "it is" - the review rules emphasize focusing on code changes and logic rather than minor text issues. This is a documentation file, but the rules don't make an exception for documentation. The rules emphasize removing comments that are obvious or unimportant.
  Documentation quality and correctness is important for user experience. Grammar errors could reflect poorly on the project's professionalism.
  While documentation quality matters, this is a very minor grammatical issue that doesn't impact understanding. The rules clearly state to avoid obvious or unimportant comments.
  Delete this comment as it addresses a minor grammatical issue that falls under "obvious or unimportant" according to the review rules.

6. docs/otel-demo/otel-demo-docs.md:172

• Draft comment:
  Grammar correction: 'The most easiest way' should be changed to 'The easiest way'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50%
  While the grammar correction is technically correct, the review rules emphasize focusing on code changes and logic issues rather than documentation style or grammar. The meaning is still clear despite the minor grammatical error. This seems like a nitpick that doesn't materially improve the content.
  The grammar error does make the documentation look less professional. Poor grammar could reflect badly on the project's quality.
  While professionalism matters, the review rules explicitly prioritize code quality and logic issues. Grammar fixes in documentation are a lower priority and can be handled in dedicated documentation reviews.
  Delete this comment as it focuses on documentation grammar rather than substantive code or logic issues.

7. docs/otel-demo/otel-demo-docs.md:250

• Draft comment:
  Typo: 'signoz-acess-token' should be 'signoz-access-token'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Marked as duplicate.

8. docs/otel-demo/otel-demo-docs.md:126

• Draft comment:
  Typo: In the comment, 'can u please add' should be 'Can you please add'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50%
  This is a comment about fixing informal language in what appears to be a temporary developer note/TODO comment. The informal language is not customer-facing and is just communication between developers. The comment itself will likely be removed once the actual implementation details are added. Nitpicking informal language in temporary developer notes is not valuable.
  The informal language could be seen as unprofessional if this comment somehow made it into production documentation. However, this appears to be a temporary note that will be removed.
  Since this is clearly a temporary developer note that will be replaced with actual implementation details, the informal language style is not important enough to warrant a comment.
  Delete this comment as it's nitpicking informal language in a temporary developer note that will be removed anyway.

Workflow ID: wflow_q8mM9WDF3PFC1wVQ

---

Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

[welcome]

Congrats on merging your first pull request!

We here at SigNoz are proud of you! 🥳