Added routing exporter #907
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #907 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 88.47% 88.55% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 245 247 +2
Lines 13089 13171 +82
==========================================
+ Hits 11581 11663 +82
Misses 1148 1148
Partials 360 360
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
jpkrohling
force-pushed
the
jpkrohling/issue1260
branch
from
8337963
to
1f09c80
Compare
Closes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1609 Signed-off-by: Juraci Paixão Kröhling <juraci@kroehling.de>
jpkrohling
force-pushed
the
jpkrohling/issue1260
branch
from
1f09c80
to
d12d560
Compare
|
@tigrannajaryan, could you please review this one, or assign someone to do it? |
processor/routingprocessor/README.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| This processor *does not* let traces to continue through the pipeline and will emit a warning in case other processor(s) are defined after this one. Similarly, exporters defined as part of the pipeline are not authoritative: if you add an exporter to the pipeline, make sure you add it to this processor *as well*, otherwise it won't be used at all. All exporters defined as part of this processor *must also* be defined as part of the pipeline's exporters. | ||
|
|
||
| Given that this processor depends on information provided by the client via HTTP headers, processors that aggregate data should not run before this processor, such as the `batch` or the `groupbytrace` processors. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This means that generally such processors cannot be used with this one. They can't be before and they can be after since everything after is ignored. Would be good to make it clear.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reworded it a bit. How does it look?
Signed-off-by: Juraci Paixão Kröhling <juraci@kroehling.de>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, I already reviewed the logic in open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1611
Note that we have just published new guidelines for PRs here: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#how-to-structure-prs-to-get-expedient-reviews
This PR would not meet the requirements of the guidelines but I am moving forward anyway since we already spent time on it and reviewed it. For the future PRs please follow the new recommendations.
This commit fixes a bug when "service.name" attribute is removed from resource structure during translation to jaeger proto format
Related to #907
|
Does the exporter consider dynamic creation? Because tenants are also dynamic |
Closes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1260
Supersedes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1611
Testing: unit tests + manual tests (see open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1611)
Documentation: README included.
Signed-off-by: Juraci Paixão Kröhling juraci@kroehling.de