Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Add gRPC query service with OTLP model #76
Add gRPC query service with OTLP model #76
Changes from 1 commit
eee874e
0bb4f36
1628cfc
70ec072
889c26d
8ab227e
00c871a
a208c8a
175506b
69cfc10
2300184
4565ddd
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
for REST/JSON API, which representation of the trace ID should we support? Jaeger's base16 or OTEL's base64?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If we expect folks to build tools that can ingest our JSONs as if they were OTLP, we should follow their representation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
good point. I expect people should be able to copy OTEL traceid (e.g. from logs) and query it directly from Jaeger.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@yurishkuro where did you find OTEL uses base64? The spec mentions hex encoding. The logging exporters use hex as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does OTEL have a spec for JSON format? If that format is rendered from proto, then it will be base64 for
bytes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, to be honest, this is the reason why I gave up back in the day when trying to make a JSON API backed by proto IDL. I thought OTEL found a solution, but the change in the spec is a total cop out - "it's std proto-JSON except for this field" (which makes std proto-JSON unusable). You mentioned they had prototypes in other languages, how did they solve that?
I am inclined to just support all kinds of formats for IDs in the inputs, i.e. you should be able to paste both base64 and hex ID into the UI. But that doesn't answer what format we return in proto-JSON, and my preference would be to stick with the standard proto-JSON for that, meaning returning base64.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
custom codes, the difficulty depends on the language so not ideal for the consumers.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also if we go with the streaming API for the get trace(s) the JSONPb codec will not work OOTB - see #76 (comment). The returned object is wrapped into another object.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Here is the upstream issue for the reference grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway#1254 (comment) and it's apparently not fixed in v2 (I have asked on their slack).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have switched impl to use base64 for embedded IDs and keep using hex for queries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what is a resource (maybe this)?
is it possible for jaeger-query to return spans from more than one resource? If so, for my learning, what are some examples?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OTEL
Resource
is similar to JaegerProcess
object see https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-proto/blob/main/opentelemetry/proto/resource/v1/resource.proto#L27.Here the returned object is a list of https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-proto/blob/main/opentelemetry/proto/trace/v1/trace.proto#L28
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's a bit tricky to construct this from Jaeger spans because we denormalize the Process into each individual span. We do have some re-assembly logic when we return spans to the UI, but it's probably also valid to just return (resource, span) pairs as denormalized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@yurishkuro do you remember why streaming was used? An alternative would be to return a list of chunks. Also we could remove chunk to
Trace
which is more idiomatic.One issue with the streaming and grpc-gateway is that it wraps the response into result - e.g.
{result: {resource_spans: ...}}
see https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger/pull/3086/files#diff-1429f7cc5a76981a44799039e43d3bc7372808373b9c2b97a333c7dcf650b00aR72There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Streaming - because large result sets are difficult to transmit as one response.
Returning chunks manually means implementing some kind of pagination API, which would require support in the storage.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
one way or another to fully support streaming the storage API would have to change anyways.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
storage API already has
FindTraceIDs
, which allows the query service to load traces one by one