Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Resource conventions: Many ambiguities #605

Open
kbrockhoff opened this issue May 14, 2020 · 4 comments
Open

Resource conventions: Many ambiguities #605

kbrockhoff opened this issue May 14, 2020 · 4 comments
Assignees
@bogdandrutu
Labels
area:semantic-conventions Related to semantic conventions release:after-ga Not required before GA release, and not going to work on before GA spec:resource Related to the specification/resource directory
Milestone
v0.6

Comments

@kbrockhoff
Copy link
Member

In the existing Resource attributes names currently appear to be sufficient to cover most use cases. However, there are many ambiguities around which attributes should be populated for a particular use case and what system property should supply the value.

There are multiple facets to this. For example, some attribute types have a required column while others don't. At least one other open issue highlights a specific item within the overall problem. #559

In order to ensure consistent implementation across all of the officially supported SDKs, I propose adding a matrix with attributes on one axis and deployment environments on the other, specifying whether an attribute should be populated and exactly where the value should be obtained from if it is populated.
@arminru arminru added area:semantic-conventions Related to semantic conventions spec:resource Related to the specification/resource directory labels May 14, 2020
@bogdandrutu bogdandrutu self-assigned this May 15, 2020
@arminru arminru added this to the v0.5 milestone May 26, 2020
@carlosalberto carlosalberto modified the milestones: v0.5, v0.6 Jun 9, 2020
@reyang reyang added the release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA label Jul 6, 2020
@andrewhsu andrewhsu added the priority:p3 Lowest priority level label Jul 24, 2020
@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

I think consistency is at least partially solved by YAML generator. Do we still need this and is it a must-have for GA?

@andrewhsu
Copy link
Member

@kbrockhoff from the issue triage mtg today, trying to bucket issues that can be addressed after GA. if you don't have more info on this by 2020-09-10, this issue will be moved to after-ga.

@kbrockhoff
Copy link
Member Author

I envision this as documentation explaining the specification. This can easily be after-ga

@tigrannajaryan tigrannajaryan added release:after-ga Not required before GA release, and not going to work on before GA and removed release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA labels Sep 9, 2020
@carlosalberto
Copy link
Contributor

@kbrockhoff Thanks!

@andrewhsu andrewhsu removed the priority:p3 Lowest priority level label Sep 9, 2020
@jsuereth jsuereth mentioned this issue Aug 13, 2024
Merged
tigrannajaryan added a commit to open-telemetry/oteps that referenced this issue Sep 26, 2024
@jsuereth @tigrannajaryan
@jack-berg @aknuds1 @dashpole
Initial Entity and Resource proposal (#264)
58d6420 
This is a proposal to address Resource and Entity data model
interactions, including a path forward to address immediate friction and
issues in the current resource specification.


The proposal includes all links and context needed to justify it, but
duplicating a snapshot here:

## Motivation

This proposal attempts to focus on the following problems within
OpenTelemetry to unblock multiple working groups:

- Allowing mutating attributes to participate in Resource ([OTEP
208](#208)).
- Allow Resource to handle entities whose lifetimes don't match the
SDK's lifetime ([OTEP
208](#208)).
- Provide support for async resource lookup
([spec#952](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#952)).
- Fix current Resource merge rules in the specification, which most
implementations violate
([oteps#208](#208),
[spec#3382](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3382),
[spec#3710](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3710)).
- Allow semantic convention resource modeling to progress
([spec#605](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#605),
[spec#559](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#559),
etc).

---------

Co-authored-by: Tigran Najaryan <4194920+tigrannajaryan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jack-berg <34418638+jack-berg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <arve.knudsen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Ashpole <dashpole@google.com>
carlosalberto pushed a commit to carlosalberto/opentelemetry-specification that referenced this issue Oct 21, 2024
@jsuereth @tigrannajaryan
@jack-berg @aknuds1 @dashpole @carlosalberto
Initial Entity and Resource proposal (open-telemetry#264)
da49499 
This is a proposal to address Resource and Entity data model
interactions, including a path forward to address immediate friction and
issues in the current resource specification.

The proposal includes all links and context needed to justify it, but
duplicating a snapshot here:

## Motivation

This proposal attempts to focus on the following problems within
OpenTelemetry to unblock multiple working groups:

- Allowing mutating attributes to participate in Resource ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry/oteps#208)).
- Allow Resource to handle entities whose lifetimes don't match the
SDK's lifetime ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry/oteps#208)).
- Provide support for async resource lookup
([spec#952](open-telemetry#952)).
- Fix current Resource merge rules in the specification, which most
implementations violate
([oteps#208](open-telemetry/oteps#208),
[spec#3382](open-telemetry#3382),
[spec#3710](open-telemetry#3710)).
- Allow semantic convention resource modeling to progress
([spec#605](open-telemetry#605),
[spec#559](open-telemetry#559),
etc).

---------

Co-authored-by: Tigran Najaryan <4194920+tigrannajaryan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jack-berg <34418638+jack-berg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <arve.knudsen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Ashpole <dashpole@google.com>
carlosalberto pushed a commit to carlosalberto/oteps that referenced this issue Oct 23, 2024
@jsuereth @tigrannajaryan
@jack-berg @aknuds1 @dashpole
Initial Entity and Resource proposal (open-telemetry#264)
42719b4 
This is a proposal to address Resource and Entity data model
interactions, including a path forward to address immediate friction and
issues in the current resource specification.


The proposal includes all links and context needed to justify it, but
duplicating a snapshot here:

## Motivation

This proposal attempts to focus on the following problems within
OpenTelemetry to unblock multiple working groups:

- Allowing mutating attributes to participate in Resource ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Allow Resource to handle entities whose lifetimes don't match the
SDK's lifetime ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Provide support for async resource lookup
([spec#952](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#952)).
- Fix current Resource merge rules in the specification, which most
implementations violate
([oteps#208](open-telemetry#208),
[spec#3382](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3382),
[spec#3710](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3710)).
- Allow semantic convention resource modeling to progress
([spec#605](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#605),
[spec#559](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#559),
etc).

---------

Co-authored-by: Tigran Najaryan <4194920+tigrannajaryan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jack-berg <34418638+jack-berg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <arve.knudsen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Ashpole <dashpole@google.com>
carlosalberto pushed a commit to carlosalberto/oteps that referenced this issue Oct 23, 2024
@jsuereth @tigrannajaryan
@jack-berg @aknuds1 @dashpole
Initial Entity and Resource proposal (open-telemetry#264)
5e7c6ce 
This is a proposal to address Resource and Entity data model
interactions, including a path forward to address immediate friction and
issues in the current resource specification.


The proposal includes all links and context needed to justify it, but
duplicating a snapshot here:

## Motivation

This proposal attempts to focus on the following problems within
OpenTelemetry to unblock multiple working groups:

- Allowing mutating attributes to participate in Resource ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Allow Resource to handle entities whose lifetimes don't match the
SDK's lifetime ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Provide support for async resource lookup
([spec#952](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#952)).
- Fix current Resource merge rules in the specification, which most
implementations violate
([oteps#208](open-telemetry#208),
[spec#3382](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3382),
[spec#3710](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3710)).
- Allow semantic convention resource modeling to progress
([spec#605](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#605),
[spec#559](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#559),
etc).

---------

Co-authored-by: Tigran Najaryan <4194920+tigrannajaryan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jack-berg <34418638+jack-berg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <arve.knudsen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Ashpole <dashpole@google.com>
carlosalberto pushed a commit to carlosalberto/oteps that referenced this issue Oct 30, 2024
@jsuereth @tigrannajaryan
@jack-berg @aknuds1 @dashpole
Initial Entity and Resource proposal (open-telemetry#264)
8fa82b4 
This is a proposal to address Resource and Entity data model
interactions, including a path forward to address immediate friction and
issues in the current resource specification.


The proposal includes all links and context needed to justify it, but
duplicating a snapshot here:

## Motivation

This proposal attempts to focus on the following problems within
OpenTelemetry to unblock multiple working groups:

- Allowing mutating attributes to participate in Resource ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Allow Resource to handle entities whose lifetimes don't match the
SDK's lifetime ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Provide support for async resource lookup
([spec#952](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#952)).
- Fix current Resource merge rules in the specification, which most
implementations violate
([oteps#208](open-telemetry#208),
[spec#3382](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3382),
[spec#3710](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3710)).
- Allow semantic convention resource modeling to progress
([spec#605](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#605),
[spec#559](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#559),
etc).

---------

Co-authored-by: Tigran Najaryan <4194920+tigrannajaryan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jack-berg <34418638+jack-berg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <arve.knudsen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Ashpole <dashpole@google.com>
carlosalberto pushed a commit to carlosalberto/opentelemetry-specification that referenced this issue Oct 31, 2024
@jsuereth @tigrannajaryan
@jack-berg @aknuds1 @dashpole
Initial Entity and Resource proposal (open-telemetry/oteps#264)
381f27c 
This is a proposal to address Resource and Entity data model
interactions, including a path forward to address immediate friction and
issues in the current resource specification.


The proposal includes all links and context needed to justify it, but
duplicating a snapshot here:

## Motivation

This proposal attempts to focus on the following problems within
OpenTelemetry to unblock multiple working groups:

- Allowing mutating attributes to participate in Resource ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry/oteps#208)).
- Allow Resource to handle entities whose lifetimes don't match the
SDK's lifetime ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry/oteps#208)).
- Provide support for async resource lookup
([spec#952](open-telemetry#952)).
- Fix current Resource merge rules in the specification, which most
implementations violate
([oteps#208](open-telemetry/oteps#208),
[spec#3382](open-telemetry#3382),
[spec#3710](open-telemetry#3710)).
- Allow semantic convention resource modeling to progress
([spec#605](open-telemetry#605),
[spec#559](open-telemetry#559),
etc).

---------

Co-authored-by: Tigran Najaryan <4194920+tigrannajaryan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jack-berg <34418638+jack-berg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <arve.knudsen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Ashpole <dashpole@google.com>
carlosalberto pushed a commit to carlosalberto/oteps that referenced this issue Oct 31, 2024
@jsuereth @tigrannajaryan
@jack-berg @aknuds1 @dashpole
Initial Entity and Resource proposal (open-telemetry#264)
9809373 
This is a proposal to address Resource and Entity data model
interactions, including a path forward to address immediate friction and
issues in the current resource specification.


The proposal includes all links and context needed to justify it, but
duplicating a snapshot here:

## Motivation

This proposal attempts to focus on the following problems within
OpenTelemetry to unblock multiple working groups:

- Allowing mutating attributes to participate in Resource ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Allow Resource to handle entities whose lifetimes don't match the
SDK's lifetime ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Provide support for async resource lookup
([spec#952](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#952)).
- Fix current Resource merge rules in the specification, which most
implementations violate
([oteps#208](open-telemetry#208),
[spec#3382](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3382),
[spec#3710](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3710)).
- Allow semantic convention resource modeling to progress
([spec#605](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#605),
[spec#559](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#559),
etc).

---------

Co-authored-by: Tigran Najaryan <4194920+tigrannajaryan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jack-berg <34418638+jack-berg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <arve.knudsen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Ashpole <dashpole@google.com>
carlosalberto pushed a commit to carlosalberto/oteps that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2024
@jsuereth @tigrannajaryan
@jack-berg @aknuds1 @dashpole
Initial Entity and Resource proposal (open-telemetry#264)
7b6322e 
This is a proposal to address Resource and Entity data model
interactions, including a path forward to address immediate friction and
issues in the current resource specification.


The proposal includes all links and context needed to justify it, but
duplicating a snapshot here:

## Motivation

This proposal attempts to focus on the following problems within
OpenTelemetry to unblock multiple working groups:

- Allowing mutating attributes to participate in Resource ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Allow Resource to handle entities whose lifetimes don't match the
SDK's lifetime ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry#208)).
- Provide support for async resource lookup
([spec#952](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#952)).
- Fix current Resource merge rules in the specification, which most
implementations violate
([oteps#208](open-telemetry#208),
[spec#3382](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3382),
[spec#3710](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3710)).
- Allow semantic convention resource modeling to progress
([spec#605](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#605),
[spec#559](open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#559),
etc).

---------

Co-authored-by: Tigran Najaryan <4194920+tigrannajaryan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jack-berg <34418638+jack-berg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <arve.knudsen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Ashpole <dashpole@google.com>
carlosalberto pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 8, 2024
@jsuereth @tigrannajaryan
@jack-berg @aknuds1 @dashpole @carlosalberto
Initial Entity and Resource proposal (open-telemetry/oteps#264)
3fd3567 
This is a proposal to address Resource and Entity data model
interactions, including a path forward to address immediate friction and
issues in the current resource specification.


The proposal includes all links and context needed to justify it, but
duplicating a snapshot here:

## Motivation

This proposal attempts to focus on the following problems within
OpenTelemetry to unblock multiple working groups:

- Allowing mutating attributes to participate in Resource ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry/oteps#208)).
- Allow Resource to handle entities whose lifetimes don't match the
SDK's lifetime ([OTEP
208](open-telemetry/oteps#208)).
- Provide support for async resource lookup
([spec#952](#952)).
- Fix current Resource merge rules in the specification, which most
implementations violate
([oteps#208](open-telemetry/oteps#208),
[spec#3382](#3382),
[spec#3710](#3710)).
- Allow semantic convention resource modeling to progress
([spec#605](#605),
[spec#559](#559),
etc).

---------

Co-authored-by: Tigran Najaryan <4194920+tigrannajaryan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jack-berg <34418638+jack-berg@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Arve Knudsen <arve.knudsen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Ashpole <dashpole@google.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@bogdandrutu bogdandrutu

Labels
area:semantic-conventions Related to semantic conventions release:after-ga Not required before GA release, and not going to work on before GA spec:resource Related to the specification/resource directory
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v0.6
Development

No branches or pull requests
7 participants
@andrewhsu @carlosalberto @bogdandrutu @kbrockhoff @tigrannajaryan @arminru @reyang