Refactor messaging attributes and per-message attributes in batching scenarios#2763
Refactor messaging attributes and per-message attributes in batching scenarios#2763lmolkova wants to merge 12 commits intoopen-telemetry:mainfrom
Conversation
e2b201f to
29fa0b6
Compare
|
This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 7 days. |
|
Not stale |
|
This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 7 days. |
|
Not stale |
6cf659b to
bfb6c8e
Compare
637a5d0 to
98eca80
Compare
25f5759 to
ceaff1b
Compare
ee0fa7b to
cdab761
Compare
cdab761 to
747411a
Compare
| * message-specific under `messaging.{system}.message` | ||
| * destination-specific under `messaging.{system}.destination` | ||
| * source-specific under `messaging.{system}.source` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For completeness and consistency, and also since I think these cases exist, I want to suggest also adding messaging.{system}.batch to this list
| | Attribute | Type | Description | Examples | Requirement Level | | ||
| |---|---|---|---|---| | ||
| | `messaging.rabbitmq.routing_key` | string | RabbitMQ message routing key. | `myKey` | Conditionally Required: If not empty. | | ||
| | `messaging.rabbitmq.message.routing_key` | string | RabbitMQ message routing key. | `myKey` | Conditionally Required: If not empty. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be messaging.rabbitmq.**destination**.routing_key?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Per Rabbit docs, routing key is a message property. It's also available on consumers
|
Also, I support moving this PR out of draft and asking for reviews from the community so we can progress towards merging this. |
pyohannes
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is ready for some wider discussion. We should open an issue, and if it's accepted, open a new clean PR based on this draft.
Add destination name - it could be per-message
9c0160e to
54c07c3
Compare
|
Thanks everyone for the review! Per discussion at the last SIG meeting, I'm going to close this one and open a new PR - #2957 (to simplify final review process). |
Messaging instrumentation SIG is working on spec changes and this change is one of the first steps to bring the consensus we reached in SIG to the spec.
This change clarifies that per-message attributes should be set on links when the corresponding span represents a batching operation. It introduced breaking changes (attribute renames)
messaging.message_idtomessaging.message.idmessaging.conversation_idtomessaging.message.conversation_idmessaging.message_payload_size_bytestomessaging.message.payload_size_bytesmessaging.message_payload_compressed_size_bytestomessaging.message.payload_compressed_size_bytes.Going forward, we'd like to reserve
messaging.message.namespace for other possible per-message attributes.It also adds the
messaging.batch_sizeattribute which intends to: