Skip to content

New convention: raid#2294

Closed
jherbage wants to merge 64 commits intoopen-telemetry:mainfrom
jherbage:raid_metrics_in_hostreceiver
Closed

New convention: raid#2294
jherbage wants to merge 64 commits intoopen-telemetry:mainfrom
jherbage:raid_metrics_in_hostreceiver

Conversation

@jherbage
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Fixes #

Changes

Attributes describing the linux only multiple device RAID arrays and their states.
Metrics to be generated by a new scraper in hostreceiver to run only on linux systems to collect metrics about these raid devices based on an existing exporter available in Prometheus' node_exporter

Note: if the PR is touching an area that is not listed in the existing areas, or the area does not have sufficient domain experts coverage, the PR might be tagged as experts needed and move slowly until experts are identified.

Merge requirement checklist

  • [ x] CONTRIBUTING.md guidelines followed.
  • [x ] Change log entry added, according to the guidelines in When to add a changelog entry.
    • If your PR does not need a change log, start the PR title with [chore]
  • [ x] schema-next.yaml updated with changes to existing conventions.
    I think this is n/a - all new stuff.

@lmolkova lmolkova moved this from Untriaged to Awaiting SIG approval in Semantic Conventions Triage May 29, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions Bot commented Jun 7, 2025

This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 7 days.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the Stale label Jun 7, 2025
Comment thread model/linux/registry.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/system/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/system/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/system/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/system/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/system/metrics.yaml Outdated
@github-actions github-actions Bot removed the Stale label Jun 11, 2025
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@thompson-tomo thompson-tomo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Would be great if we did not restrict it to Linux.

Comment thread model/system/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/system/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/system/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/linux/registry.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/linux/registry.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/linux/registry.yaml Outdated
@jherbage jherbage requested review from a team and tigrannajaryan as code owners July 1, 2025 15:57
Comment thread model/raid/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/registry.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/registry.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/registry.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/registry.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/raid/registry.yaml Outdated
@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this from Awaiting SIG approval to Blocked in Semantic Conventions Triage Jul 10, 2025
Comment thread model/storage/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread model/storage/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread docs/registry/attributes/raid.md Outdated
@lmolkova lmolkova moved this from Blocked to Awaiting SIG approval in Semantic Conventions Triage Jul 17, 2025
Comment thread model/storage/metrics.yaml Outdated
Comment thread docs/storage/metrics.md
Comment on lines +3 to +5
path_base_for_github_subdir:
from: content/en/docs/specs/semconv/http/_index.md
to: http/README.md
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
path_base_for_github_subdir:
from: content/en/docs/specs/semconv/http/_index.md
to: http/README.md

The doc is also missing the main header

change_type: new_component

# The name of the area of concern in the attributes-registry, (e.g. http, cloud, db)
component: system
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
component: system
component: storage

component: system

# A brief description of the change. Surround your text with quotes ("") if it needs to start with a backtick (`).
note: Proposed metric semantics for a scraper in hostreceiver scraping raid metrics related to multiple device RAID disks
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe make this note more generic, something like: Introduce storage attributes and metrics

@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this from Awaiting codeowners approval to Blocked in Semantic Conventions Triage Oct 15, 2025
@joaopgrassi
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Please also update the PR title as it's not up-to-date with the changes.

attributes:
- ref: storage.volume.name
- ref: hw.state
- ref: hw.type
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think that we need this.

unit: "{disk}"
attributes:
- ref: storage.volume.name
- ref: hw.state
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@thompson-tomo thompson-tomo Oct 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Am thinking we should go with disk.mode to avoid overloading hw.state.

@lmolkova
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@jherbage - thanks for the contribution!

This PR adds new area - storage and we don't have an active SIG for it. Given that there is just one component in otel ecosystem that would currently follow this convention, I'd recommend documenting it in the corresponding collector receiver and bringing it to semconv once there is more than one instrumentation.

I'm going to close this PR because of the above reasons. Feel free to reopen if @open-telemetry/semconv-system-approvers would be ready to own the storage area and if multiple instrumentations would start following these conventions.

@lmolkova lmolkova closed this Nov 17, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

Archived in project

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.