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

[Feature Request] Deduplication of attributes #1300

Open
cijothomas opened this issue Oct 13, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

[Feature Request] Deduplication of attributes #1300

cijothomas opened this issue Oct 13, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
A-common Area:common issues that not related to specific pillar

Comments

@cijothomas
Copy link
Member

As of today, Logs API/SDK does not do de-deuplication.
Tracing API/SDK does do de-duplication for SpanAttributes, but it is being removed. There is no de-duplication done for Event Attributes and Link Attributes.
Metrics API/SDK does do de-duplication, but it could be removed.

Please comment on this issue, if you are an end-user who want a feature from this repo to do the de-duplication. This is typically the case, if you, as instrumentation author, cannot enforce it, and your backend does not support it either. When you comment here, please describe the scenario in detail, so that we can design a solution to cover that. In general, if we chose to offer a feature for this, it'll be opt-in basis, as there is significant overhead to do de-duplication.

@hdost
Copy link
Contributor

hdost commented Oct 14, 2023

I'd like to bring up #1297

@TommyCpp TommyCpp added the A-common Area:common issues that not related to specific pillar label Oct 17, 2023
@hdost
Copy link
Contributor

hdost commented Oct 17, 2023

I'd like to bring up #1297

As discussed this is not necessarily a deviation from the spec, but I still think this might be worthy of some sort of mention that by default we don't ship with de-duplication. However, this is interesting as I believe it only applies to attributes and not necessarily Resources.

@hdost
Copy link
Contributor

hdost commented Nov 29, 2023

Discussion at the SIG yesterday made me think that we do want to be consistent with our API around around this, so we may want to have a followup to #1293 which behaves in a way similar to our AttributeSet discussion.

@cijothomas
Copy link
Member Author

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3931 (comment) From spec, only applicable for logs, still in discussion only.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-common Area:common issues that not related to specific pillar
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants