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

Do not validate instrumentation, if the whole SDK is disabled. #1453

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

profuel
Copy link

@profuel profuel commented Dec 12, 2024

Do not validate instrumentation, if the whole SDK is disabled.

Do not validate instrumentation, if the whole SDK is disabled.
@profuel profuel requested a review from a team as a code owner December 12, 2024 08:07
Copy link

welcome bot commented Dec 12, 2024

Thanks for opening your first pull request! If you haven't yet signed our Contributor License Agreement (CLA), then please do so that we can accept your contribution. A link should appear shortly in this PR if you have not already signed one.

Copy link

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Dec 12, 2024

CLA Signed


The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 13, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.36%. Comparing base (4a021fb) to head (b6e032b).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/SDK/Sdk.php 50.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #1453      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     73.26%   73.36%   +0.09%     
- Complexity     2685     2686       +1     
============================================
  Files           387      387              
  Lines          8009     8011       +2     
============================================
+ Hits           5868     5877       +9     
+ Misses         2141     2134       -7     
Flag Coverage Δ
8.1 72.95% <50.00%> (-0.04%) ⬇️
8.2 73.18% <50.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
8.3 73.21% <50.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
8.4 ?
8.5 73.25% <50.00%> (+0.06%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/SDK/Sdk.php 95.23% <50.00%> (-4.77%) ⬇️

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 4a021fb...b6e032b. Read the comment docs.

@brettmc
Copy link
Collaborator

brettmc commented Dec 13, 2024

This needs some thought. Per spec, disabling the SDK should still allow propagators: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/main/specification/configuration/sdk-environment-variables.md#general-sdk-configuration
We have auto-instrumentations for http clients, and would expect that they would still propagate distributed trace headers if the SDK is disabled. I think this would break that?

@profuel
Copy link
Author

profuel commented Dec 13, 2024

That's an interesting detail, I was missing.
Could you please help me understand - does it mean that this code is not correct?
https://github.com/spryker/otel-rabbit-mq-instrumentation/blob/master/_register.php
And we have to use similar logic to this :

$disabledInstrumentations = Configuration::getList(Variables::OTEL_PHP_DISABLED_INSTRUMENTATIONS);

return [self::OTEL_PHP_DISABLED_INSTRUMENTATIONS_ALL] === $disabledInstrumentations || in_array($name, $disabledInstrumentations);

Thank you for your help!

@brettmc
Copy link
Collaborator

brettmc commented Dec 13, 2024

does it mean that this code is not correct

I think it probably doesn't matter for rabbitmq (it's not performing distributed tracing). Our current thinking is that if the SDK is disabled, then when you fetch tracers/meters/loggers from the various providers, you'll get a no-op instance.

@brettmc
Copy link
Collaborator

brettmc commented Dec 19, 2024

@profuel thanks for your contribution, however we won't progress with this change due to the propagator thing - it would break some of our instrumentations according to spec.

@brettmc brettmc closed this Dec 19, 2024
@profuel profuel deleted the patch-1 branch December 19, 2024 07:59
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.

2 participants