-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 896
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
Clarify semantic conventions around span start and end time #592
Clarify semantic conventions around span start and end time #592
Conversation
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.
Why would we want to call this out just for HTTP spans? It is a general principle - if span represents an operation (be it an RPC or an internal function), its timestamps should be as close to operation start and end as possible.
I think that's fair. for http in particular web servers (and sometimes clients) incorporate some common middleware that adds to the cost of the request. I felt like the most ambiguity was there. I could take a stab at clarifying this is a more general place. |
Feedback states that the clarification around the meaning of the span start and end times could be more generic. Starting a proposal around by adding an example to the API.
One thing to consider is to make the Http example a more general RPC one. No strong feeling though. Overall good as an example ;) |
Rewording recommendation to use a more generic RPC Adding a small blurb clarifying sub operations can be instrumented.
1797a7d
to
8099078
Compare
done! rewritten to a more generic RPC. |
Please resolve comments so we can get this merged :) |
Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <armin.ruech@dynatrace.com> Co-authored-by: Christian Neumüller <christian+github@neumueller.me>
@bogdandrutu addressed! |
@bogdandrutu these are addressed now, thanks! |
…emetry#592) * Adding http semantic conventions for span start and end times. * Corrected send to end, further clarified timings. * Moving span operation clarification to api Feedback states that the clarification around the meaning of the span start and end times could be more generic. Starting a proposal around by adding an example to the API. * Addressing feedback Rewording recommendation to use a more generic RPC Adding a small blurb clarifying sub operations can be instrumented. * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <armin.ruech@dynatrace.com> Co-authored-by: Christian Neumüller <christian+github@neumueller.me> * Expanding on child spans Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <armin.ruech@dynatrace.com> Co-authored-by: Christian Neumüller <christian+github@neumueller.me>
…emetry#592) * Adding http semantic conventions for span start and end times. * Corrected send to end, further clarified timings. * Moving span operation clarification to api Feedback states that the clarification around the meaning of the span start and end times could be more generic. Starting a proposal around by adding an example to the API. * Addressing feedback Rewording recommendation to use a more generic RPC Adding a small blurb clarifying sub operations can be instrumented. * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <armin.ruech@dynatrace.com> Co-authored-by: Christian Neumüller <christian+github@neumueller.me> * Expanding on child spans Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <armin.ruech@dynatrace.com> Co-authored-by: Christian Neumüller <christian+github@neumueller.me>
Fixes #591.
Adding semantic conventions for http start and end times. This has previously caused some ambiguity in the start / end times that instrumentations should target.