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.

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

[otlp] Remove ilogger and exception attributes #4781

Conversation

vishweshbankwar
Copy link
Member

@vishweshbankwar vishweshbankwar commented Aug 17, 2023

Fixes #
Design discussion issue #

Changes

This PR excludes the following fields on LogRecord from being exported by the OTLP exporter:

  • EventId
  • CategoryName
  • Exception

Please provide a brief description of the changes here.

Merge requirement checklist

  • CONTRIBUTING guidelines followed (nullable enabled, static analysis, etc.)
  • Unit tests added/updated
  • Appropriate CHANGELOG.md files updated for non-trivial changes
  • Changes in public API reviewed (if applicable)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 17, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #4781 (559f26f) into main (77b3a1e) will decrease coverage by 0.10%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4781      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.46%   85.36%   -0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         314      314              
  Lines       12940    12930      -10     
==========================================
- Hits        11059    11038      -21     
- Misses       1881     1892      +11     
Files Changed Coverage Δ
...etryProtocol/Implementation/LogRecordExtensions.cs 80.00% <ø> (-12.50%) ⬇️

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

@vishweshbankwar vishweshbankwar marked this pull request as ready for review August 17, 2023 19:30
@vishweshbankwar vishweshbankwar requested a review from a team as a code owner August 17, 2023 19:30
Copy link
Member

@alanwest alanwest left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. One small thing to address regarding a test.

Copy link
Member

@CodeBlanch CodeBlanch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@utpilla utpilla merged commit 97091de into open-telemetry:main Aug 21, 2023
50 checks passed
@@ -2,6 +2,11 @@

## Unreleased

* Excluded attributes corresponding to `LogRecord.EventId`,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

its better if we add a stronger message here, as this is a significant breaking change for users who are relying on these features.

Breaking/Please Note or something to catch attention.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not having the EventId & Category properties makes it harder to filter log messages to the ones that you care about. They could go in the attributes as they are SDK specific.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not having the EventId & Category properties makes it harder to filter log messages to the ones that you care about. They could go in the attributes as they are SDK specific.

+1

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not having the EventId & Category properties makes it harder to filter log messages to the ones that you care about. They could go in the attributes as they are SDK specific.

Indeed. Missed this in last week's release notes and ran into this today. Was a real head-scratcher for a few hours because this is the last place I expected these (fairly ubiquitous) dotnet attrs to be getting dropped ☹️

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants