-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.5k
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
Fix retrieval of peer.service from Zipkin's MESSAGE_ADDR annotation #3312
Conversation
b976e3b
to
da9789d
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3312 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 95.96% 95.98% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 259 259
Lines 15434 15434
==========================================
+ Hits 14811 14814 +3
+ Misses 527 526 -1
+ Partials 96 94 -2
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't know much about Zipkin, but the change looks reasonable to me. I'll leave this open a little longer for other reviewers with more Zipkin experience to take a look as well.
347bf7c
to
c2044cb
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think there is a missing dependency in these tests. You're trying to validate that a zipkin json will be transformed into Jaeger span with peer.servce=kafka
tag? But the tests don't actually invoke zipkin thrift -> jaeger converter, so there's no end-to-end test, and this is why it's difficult to see the impact of this change.
Might this be the code I need to build a more thorough test? https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger/blob/master/model/converter/thrift/zipkin/to_domain.go#L80 |
Yes |
cec6c55
to
1a4044c
Compare
@yurishkuro I think I fixed the problem now. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
Signed-off-by: Martin Schimandl <martin.schimandl@gmail.com>
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
196eed6
to
2655d7e
Compare
@yurishkuro had to push once more, because linter was not happy. |
Which problem is this PR solving?
Resolves #2399
Short description of the changes
Adding a test case to address #2399