Repository navigation
Restore compliance between Composite Samplers code and specs - #8450
Conversation
The Composite Samplers based on Consistent Probability Sampling are described at https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/v1.57.0/oteps/trace/0250-Composite_Samplers.md
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. ❌ Your project check has failed because the head coverage (82.30%) is below the target coverage (89.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #8450 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 91.02% 82.45% -8.57%
- Complexity 7817 10465 +2648
============================================
Files 893 1062 +169
Lines 23719 32133 +8414
Branches 2364 4418 +2054
============================================
+ Hits 21590 26496 +4906
- Misses 1408 4810 +3402
- Partials 721 827 +106 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
zeitlinger
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with removing traceId from GetSamplingIntent and with the adjusted-count naming, but the OTEP still lists TraceId as a required Predicate argument. Is that part of the OTEP stale/inconsistent? If so, could you link the spec issue/PR or clarify the intended interpretation here?
Good catch! Yes, the OTEP (https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/v1.57.0/oteps/trace/0250-Composite_Samplers.md#predicate) lists |
|
@PeterF778 this looks good but for the sampling SIG - OTEPs are just the original proposal but stop being the source of truth once they are codified in spec text. In this case, the source of truth is now: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/v1.57.0/specification/trace/sdk.md#getsamplingintent Can someone from the sampling SIG go and update https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blame/efceef79720efc238645666139a7cee1b0145df1/specification/trace/sdk.md#L661 to reflect your update here? Thanks. |
| * (reciprocal of sampling probability, used by Span-to-Metrics estimation) reliably, because a | ||
| * non-consistent-probability sampling decision might have affected the threshold value. | ||
| * | ||
| * @return true iff the threshold can be reliably used for adjusted count calculation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| * @return true iff the threshold can be reliably used for adjusted count calculation | |
| * @return true if the threshold can be reliably used for adjusted count calculation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this intended to mean "If and only if"? if so, maybe better to spell it out in case someone isn't familiar with the abbreviation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, indeed. Thanks, I'll fix it later today.
@jack-berg Does this change require an Issue? |
|
Yes, but just as a formality |
|
|
a2b7a68 to
b837e4c
Compare
|
I messed up the branch with my first commit this morning, so I restored it to the previous state. |
The updates to the specs are merged now (open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#5161). Can we proceed with this PR? |
The Composite Samplers based on Consistent Probability Sampling are described at https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/v1.57.0/oteps/trace/0250-Composite_Samplers.md