Skip to content
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

[chore] [exporter/datasetexporter] Simplify trace exporter, get rid of the client side aggregation code #23881

Conversation

tomaz-s1
Copy link
Contributor

@tomaz-s1 tomaz-s1 commented Jul 3, 2023

This pull request updates trace exporter code and gets rid of client side aggregation / populating of services,span_count and error_count attributes.

This client side aggregation is not needed anymore since it now happens on the server side.

It's worth noting that this client side aggregation was meant as a quick short term workaround / hack early in the development cycle (special thanks to @martin-majlis-s1 for implementing this workaround so quickly on the client side).

It was never meant as a long term solution since it had multiple edge cases and problems associated with it - it would only really work correctly / as expected in case all the spans which belong to the same trace are part of the same batch received by the plugin. And of course that won't be true in many scenarios - different spans are routed to different collectors, long running spans which are not part of the same batch, no guarantees how batches are assembled, etc.

As part of this change, traces.aggregate and traces.max_wait config options have also been made obsolete / redundant.

Those config options have also been removed - since the plugin is still an alpha (some breaking changes are expected) we still have the luxury of being able to do that.

Removing this code also makes the plugin code much simpler now - and who doesn't like removing code and simplifying things (less thing to maintain and worry about edge cases, etc.) :)

aggregation which is not needed anymore (populating services, span_count
and error_count attributes on the client side).

This aggregation now happens on the server side and implementing it on
the client side was always meant as a short term workaround early in the
development cycle since this approach had many edge cases and only would
work correctly / as expected in some limited situations.
as a temporary workaround until a proper approach is implemented on the
server side.
# you should instead start your pull request title with [chore] or use the "Skip Changelog" label.

# One of 'breaking', 'deprecation', 'new_component', 'enhancement', 'bug_fix'
change_type: breaking
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I labeled it as breaking even though plugin is still in alpha stage and some breaking changes can be expected in alpha stage. Let me know if this should be changed.

@tomaz-s1 tomaz-s1 changed the title [exporter/datasetexporter] Simplify trace exporter, get rid of the client side aggregation code [chore] [exporter/datasetexporter] Simplify trace exporter, get rid of the client side aggregation code Jul 3, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@martin-majlis-s1 martin-majlis-s1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great work! Thanks @tomaz-s1. :)

@tomaz-s1
Copy link
Contributor Author

@atoulme Please let me know if there is anything I can do / help with, with regards to the review process. Thanks.

Copy link
Contributor

@atoulme atoulme left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. It's definitely ok to have breaking changes while in alpha.

Copy link
Contributor

@zdaratom-s1 zdaratom-s1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@mx-psi mx-psi merged commit 71e5297 into open-telemetry:main Jul 13, 2023
89 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the next release milestone Jul 13, 2023
mx-psi pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 2, 2023
… retry_shutdown_timeout (#24415)

**Description:** Introduce `server_host` configuration to allow
specifying server host and `retry_shutdown_timeout` to specify time for
the shutdown function


There is new configuration option `server_host` that allows specifying
how to fill the field `ServerHost` of the `Event` structure.

New configuration for `server_host` looks like this:

```
    server_host:
      # If these attributes are not specified or empty,
      # use the value from the env variable SERVER_HOST
      use_host: ${env:SERVER_HOST}
      # If it's not set, use the hostname value
      use_hostname: true
```

This configuration is applied for logs and traces.

Since it's touching the same code, I have already merged changes from
this PR -
#23881
- into this branch, hoping that it will be merged soon. It's still not
merged, so it's blocked by this.

New configuration for `retry_shutdown_timeout` looks like this:
```
    buffer:
      # Send buffer to the API at least every 5s
      max_lifetime: 5s
      # Group data based on these attributes
      group_by:
        - attributes.container_id
        - container_id
      # try to send data to the DataSet for at most 30s during shutdown
      retry_shutdown_timeout: 30s
```

This configuration specifies how much time the shutdown function has to
send all the data that it has already accepted.

**Link to tracking Issue:**
#24252

**Testing:** 

I have added several unit tests to make sure that it works as expected.


**Documentation:** There is new section in the README describing the
newly added configuration options.

---------

Co-authored-by: tomas.zdara <tomas.zdara@sentinelone.com>
Co-authored-by: Tomaz Muraus <tomazm@sentinelone.com>
Co-authored-by: Tomaz Muraus <126863902+tomaz-s1@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants