-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
[processor/k8sattr] Use RFC3339 format for creation timestamp value #24016
[processor/k8sattr] Use RFC3339 format for creation timestamp value #24016
Conversation
@bryan-aguilar can you include in your description a before and after example of how the change affects the timestamp. |
@TylerHelmuth done, thanks for the suggestion. Do you think this should be in the changelog entry also? |
@bryan-aguilar ya in the subtext section |
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.
This component is ubiquitous enough that we probably need to follow our deprecation process and utilize feature gates for this breaking change. @dmitryax what do you think?
Sounds good to me. @bryan-aguilar can you please run it by a feature gate and show a warning if this attribute is enabled? |
Yup, will do. |
@dmitryax Pod start time is enabled by default which would lead to us always showing a warning. Is this in line with what you had in mind? |
It is enabled by default, but we don't need to show the warning for users specifying |
@TylerHelmuth @dmitryax I have added a feature gate for this change. Indicating in the warning that the default behavior will be changed in v0.83.0. From what I could tell there was not a better mechanism to signal this other than a logging statement. |
Description: This PR changes the format used for the
k8s.pod.start_time
value. Previously the .String() method was used but documentation for that says it should only be used for debugging. Instead use .MarshalText() which formats in RFC3339.I have listed this as a breaking change because it is possible that end users are making assertions on the format of this timestamp value.
Timestamp output:
before:
2023-07-10 12:34:39.740638 -0700 PDT m=+0.020184946
after
2023-07-10T12:39:53.112485-07:00
Link to tracking Issue: n/a
Testing: Updated unit tests.
Documentation: Add blurb at bottom of readme