Add support for LowMemory metrics temporality #2234
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2234 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 87.31% 87.31%
=======================================
Files 169 169
Lines 4900 4900
=======================================
Hits 4278 4278
Misses 622 622 |
owent
approved these changes
Jul 13, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes #2233
Changes
This PR adds a new AggregationTemporalitySelector for LowMemory with mapping between instrument types and aggregation temporality.
This is a BREAKING change for OTLP metrics exporter configuration, as
OtlpHttpMetricExporterOptionsandOtlpGrpcMetricExporterOptionsclass now useexporter::otlp::PreferredAggregationTemporalityinstead ofsdk::metrics::AggregationTemporalityas member. We could have instead kept both the fields to avoid this breaking change, but felt this is cleaner approach, unless there are other thoughts.For significant contributions please make sure you have completed the following items:
CHANGELOG.mdupdated for non-trivial changes