Open Telemetry Uncategorized, 26 Aug 2022

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: 2022-08-26 meeting

Description

Instrumentation: Messaging

A

A

B

C

Hi dmitry, oh man, your uh office looks, looks empty today. It's.

A

B

A

B

C

Off on you, I mean.

B

Yeah, it's just all for me. I'm no one is here like once a week once a week, people come but other days, I'm just all for myself.

C

Gotta save the uh gotta, save that energy turn the lights off. That's what they're doing behind you.

B

Yeah, it's automatically turned on.

C

No one's no one's walking through there anymore, so the lights aren't getting triggered. Yeah.

C

It looks like uh maybe there was.

A

C

It looks like maybe last week uh this meeting didn't happen. uh I don't think I was there last week.

B

I joined no one else joined and I just like I dropped audi. I don't.

C

Want to do it myself, yeah. I know I do the same thing. Well, uh I can share the screen today. I've got it pulled up already um go ahead and instead of starting at the top, I thought we could start at the uh where we left off last time, which I think was here, but someone did that once I'm gonna go to the second page, I'll just go up from the bottom, sound good.

B

Yeah, that sounds good.

C

Sweet uh this one's got a pr open already, so I'm just going to assign it to newly and.

A

Put a p2 on it.

A

C

I don't know, I don't think we have labels for the the translators packages.

A

B

Be, let's just have it eventually.

C

We should add some yeah the little script. I wrote didn't uh factor in well. It's I think it's package translator. It should have that yeah, but it didn't go. It didn't go any deeper yeah! That's right! That's.

B

C

Sweet uh right.

C

Like this, one just needs a priority.

A

C

It seems like they fail kind of often so.

B

Jurassic won't take a look and.

C

This person sounds like they're gonna, take a look at it.

B

Okay, yeah, let's assign to him to them and uh and probably p2. I believe.

A

A

C

And it looks like maybe jurassic's already put some stuff on here.

C

Lots going on so.

C

Yeah he's assigned himself uh put that on there and p2.

A

Yeah, probably poop.

C

Oh, my order got messed up.

A

Here we are see all right.

C

C

Two or three for this: do you think.

B

It's it's three, I believe we're already doing a good job. I don't know what they want to scrape.

C

B

Like severity and that's mostly, it yeah uh buddy yeah, timestamp, timestamp, okay, cool.

C

This one's got priority, so I'm gonna skip it.

C

I think you something happened with this recently.

A

B

Like yeah, that's actually pretty interesting work. I have created a pr, oh that's, cool. I need to check that one can you I don't know. Who is that.

C

Yeah, I don't know this person, oh I'm hiding stuff. Okay, this isn't collector. So they've submitted something to the collector core. It's.

B

Completely, it's it's different thing.

A

B

A

So what we want to have.

B

Is that we want to automatically generate docs from config.go, and the docs should be should be like yaml format and with all the like documentation about all of the fields and the faults currently is. It can be with this tool that pablo did, but it generates like not very human, readable format, it's like tables and so on. We want to make it like gotcha.

C

B

C

Up, so is this just an enhancement to configuration.

B

It's do it, it is enhancement. Yes, it is an enhancement, it's not a bucket, I believe, and I would yeah I would put uh because we already have that.

B

Feature, but it's not like it's just like abandoned, we need to use it yeah.

C

Actually, is there a component that it's related to, or is it more just overall.

B

If you can, if you see cmg kind of fix something, can you try to look for that.

C

Yep there is, I they're.

B

All they all exist.

C

Now, sweet, okay, cool.

A

A

C

That one's good priority, that's the priority, that's a vendor specific component that I think is actually getting worked on right now. New component.

A

B

All right can you.

C

B

That, I guess to the person who said.

C

Yeah who's going to work on it, uh tamir.

C

And then I think this gets a accepted component label.

A

C

Wait that doesn't happen very often.

A

A

C

Seems good, I don't think this is a bug.

B

And there's still very pull requests for that.

A

A

A

uh I'll put the exporter on there.

A

Next order and let's do observability.

C

This just maybe package translator.

A

B

Or like receiver, I don't understand.

C

Well, there they've linked to something that's in the trench but yeah I don't I can put yesterday, I'm just going to also ping um anthony and dimitri or not dimitri, david.

A

C

And I don't know the priority on this at all, so might be.

A

B

I don't know it's sounds like a buck. Let's put through.

C

Okay, do you want me to put a bug on? Oh it's already on there. Okay.

C

I saw this one in a slack channel.

C

I think anthony actually applied in the slide channel as well.

C

It seemed like an actual thing, so I'll do a priority 2 on here and move on.

C

I mean, I guess, that's a misconfiguration, that's something that probably the validate function should be checking so that the collector doesn't even get here right.

B

Yeah, I believe we just like sent this part of the config to prometheus library and we just don't care, but we probably need to introduce some some kind of validation on our site. I'm not sure.

C

Should put a p1 on this since it crashes the collector.

B

I don't think it's.

C

Like, oh, that's not crashing the collector, that's just don't panic technically, but it doesn't actually start up correctly. It tries to start it and then it panics the collector.

B

Yeah yeah, I I would put it too.

A

C

That's always a good thing.

A

You anything for tests on here test cover cool.

A

Your three oh yeah, sorry, I.

C

Forgot about that one.

A

They also said they're going to start appearing, so you could probably just assign it. I will do that.

C

A

I don't understand this request.

B

You want to use attribute processor as a library, yeah.

A

Oh okay: let's see it's package.

B

At other, maybe at the reaction or something.

C

Do we have, I think we have an attributes package.

A

I think that's what this issue is. I think.

C

About what they're asking to do, I don't think we have internal flags for the config package either. That's, I think, that's where this lives in our I forget. I think, there's some stuff in here for okay.

B

Yeah and going this is going to duplicate it. We probably should let them know. Should we reply that this is going to be deprecated and.

B

They should not rely on this.

A

What do we need to do then?.

C

Hello, bargain.

A

C

What's your question.

A

What do we miss? Why do we say it is possible.

C

uh Because it's not happened yet.

A

B

As not merged, but it's going to be replaced if it's completely different like thing.

C

Yeah so like personally, would replace the entire attributes processor, but like community, like that's a pretty entrenched processor, so like I'd like to replace it completely and have people use the transform processor. But I could also foresee a world where the attributes processor just uses the conditions from the telemetry query language package. I don't.

A

A

I think it will be a much harder deprecation process to replace that.

A

So we better deprecate the entire thing, and we say hey here, is how you do it, and maybe we provide a simpler processor just to transform attributes or whatever we call it.

A

That is focus on attributes if we want based on uh tql or whatever the transferring language or or give them a equivalent of, like condition uh configuration in in right.

C

That's why I'm working on I've actually got a pr out there right now for a declarative syntax for the trans for the telemetry query language, to make things like this easier um that it's possible that the attributes processor sticks around, but it behind the scenes. It's updated to use the telemetry query language and its declarative, syntax um versus, like everyone replacing all of their processes everywhere. I don't know yet.

B

And duplication message we can like on the fly, generate the configuration for transform, processing.

C

B

C

B

The translator, I think.

C

To go from this to this, that, like, if you have this config for the attributes, processor or whatever it tri it spits out. This is what it looks like for whatever I've I'd like to do that as well, uh so you.

B

Think I should.

C

Not add anything on this component for this issue, you don't want me to add any comments.

A

Just tell them, but can they can they use a transform processor right now.

C

uh Probably not, let's read it in.

B

But we shouldn't expose any developer api for the com for the component. That's going to be duplicated right. It doesn't show.

C

B

C

Yeah they just it, sounds like they want to have yeah, I would say: look at you like. I think that they could use query language package instead of these actions, because they could just have access to set so I'll just say.

A

Not package with the uh with that process.

C

I don't think he needs a processor, though here, though, because it looks like he's trying to he's interacting with some api, like he's trying to mess with collector's config.

A

But that's way way way.

A

Okay, but that then, then he has everything that he needs in the api. I don't think we need any package, but anyway, yeah.

C

Hard, I don't know I don't. I don't have all the details that what they're trying to do.

A

Just tell them to use that processor and if they tell tell them the process or it's probably them, okay,.

A

A

A

I don't know if this is a.

C

A

C

A

It's failing through.

A

I'm just going to put.

C

Logan priority and let the code owners take care of it.

A

C

I'm gonna assign it to this person.

B

Yeah and probably it's gonna go down there for that as well.

C

All right, final storage extension.

C

It's already assigned to him.

A

So we just need to put a priority.

C

C

This might be a component request.

C

Do we have any existing components that would do something like this command metrics, wouldn't.

B

Yeah we have spawn metrics processor, it's probably they want something similar for logs. I don't.

C

B

C

I'm looking to make sure we don't have an open issue.

C

B

But, given that we are moving from because of open census open to emitter, it's I don't know.

B

Another thing to take care of later on.

A

A

All right, that's got a priority sequence for me: duplicate sql functionality.

B

Yeah, this is the thing we need to discuss. I was spinning uh then, about this, but yeah. I believe he didn't like. Can you click on the next one yeah this one? Can you scroll down a bit?

B

If you have any reply yeah? This is essentially nothing yet. I.

C

Think dan might be out of the office yeah. I think dan's somewhere right now. Okay,.

B

So so we're going to discuss now if we have time so, the idea is that we we want to introduce another receiver that takes metric from the database and those metrics are internal, existing metrics and that's that will be oracle db receiver. But we already have like generic sql query receiver, that essentially, like you, provide some like sql queries you get metrics from. So we want to utilize that receiver, instead of instead of introducing new one uh and like actually the duplicating all the work, all the code, yeah.

A

B

To for database connection and stuff like that, so we want some interface uh that we can use where it will accept, like queries and uh or metrics that we will get the results without and the the question like. If we go that road, do we want to have each receiver for four different uh database and reuse, a sql query receiver? As a library we want to have sql library, sql, query receiver, with some kind of presets, with some kind of preconfigured uh like options for for system metrics or which database something like that.

C

My gut says that there's always going to be the opportunity for the different database types to require something specific for their needs in order to get you know, some sort of internal metric or like some side, metric from some site, api endpoint or something that's not just a sql query.

C

So, like I, I kind of like the concept of components per type with the library more the buttons, but.

B

If it's not going to be local.

C

Queries then, maybe just one.

B

It's not going to be like the same internal metrics for each data for each database type it will be based on the driver. We need to provide driver anyway, and driver can be like progressed oracle on my microsoft sequels. So we.

C

Would just the config would switch the driver kind of like uh the resource detection, processor kind of like switches out? You know what you're detecting.

B

No, it you need to provide a driver as a configuration configuration.

C

That's what I'm saying you have to you have to provide the driver yourself. So the yes.

B

But the set of query sql queries that we we use to get the internal metrics will be will be different based by by driver, but I'm thinking it can be also different. Based on the like database version right postgres different postgres version can use different different database for internal metrics and things like that, but that also can be configured in one and one uh receiver instead of different receivers. So that's that's mostly the question here.

C

B

C

Reducing components, that's why I like the transform processor uh as long as like the configuration for that component, isn't really complicated. I guess like if there's gonna be like totally different config sections for the different drivers. That might be an indicator that it should be different components, but if they can be simply reduced and then just have like you know, flags that switch what things are being used and I think a single component could make sense.

B

In that component, we already have driver. We need to specify which driver to use. We probably will have another version, I believe, but it's not necessary and the only additional the configuration interface is going to be like scrap system, metrics, true or false, and likely it will be false by default. This. This is my like my idea about that. So, if you use the same receiver, it will be just additional one additional option for so far as boolean option and like a set of set of system metrics will be predefined in the receiver itself.

C

Yeah and then the scrape system metrics would that change based on the driver, as the user configures.

A

C

Driver yes, yeah.

B

C

Okay, and it would just, and it would whatever driver you select, it just knows which systems or how to go, get the specific things.

A

Yeah, that sounds good.

C

Yeah, this is probably a good thing to put on the uh meeting on wednesday, too. I'm sure there's some other people that have opinions, but reducing the number of components, as long as the config is simple is a good concept.

B

Yeah, I just I, I think we have too many too many receivers somehow and generalize them.

C

Yeah, like with the host metrics receiver, it's not like we made one for linux and windows for all the other different hosts, like it's all, combined into one and then just knows how to go, get it. So I like that.

A

B

uh Turn this one back here thank.

A

C

What do you want to do with this particular yeah.

B

A

C

Leave it, as is for.

C

Oh- and this is just the follow up for that, so we won't touch that either we'll just go to the next page.

B

Yeah, I believe, we're out of time.

A

And we're at time well.

C

We almost caught up, we got, we got one extra page left, but that's okay. We that was two weeks worth of stuff to review. Yeah.

B

We'll do it.

A

Later, okay, cool, thank you.

C

Yep cool thanks. Everyone.

A

See you all right see everyone.