fix(gql)!: conform GraphQL span name to spec

[naseemkullah]

Which problem is this PR solving?

Rename graphql "execute" spans to "<operation.type> <operation.name>" to conform to the spec.

In addition to conforming to the spec, this change can provide additional value for monitoring purposes. In cases where o11y providers generate metrics from pre-ingested traces (without all the attributes), the new naming convention makes it easier to group and filter metrics by operation type and name, since it is now reflected in the span name. This can be particularly useful for setting up monitors or alerts.

Short description of the changes

When operation name and type are determined within the execute span, span.updateName() is called.

The query steps other than "execute"'s spans are out of scope as they
do not need to be renamed.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1444 (5622c65) into main (861b867) will decrease coverage by 1.31%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1444      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.13%   94.82%   -1.31%     
==========================================
  Files          14        2      -12     
  Lines         906       58     -848     
  Branches      197        4     -193     
==========================================
- Hits          871       55     -816     
+ Misses         35        3      -32     

see 16 files with indirect coverage changes

[dyladan]

Overall LGTM

[mwear]

LGTM, but I have one question about the changelog. I see there's a changelog for each package, and for contrib as a whole. Are they generated automatically? Is there something we can do to make it completely clear to users that the span name will change after upgrading?

[rauno56]

👍 Changelogs are created automatically on release PRs.

Other than emphasizing it in the changelog and bumping major(which we cannot do, because 0.x), I don't know how to make it more clear, especially since we're fixing spec noncompliance.

[pichlermarc]

+1 Changelogs are created automatically on release PRs.

Other than emphasizing it in the changelog and bumping major(which we cannot do, because 0.x), I don't know how to make it more clear, especially since we're fixing spec noncompliance.

I also think there's nothing we can do to make it clearer. I think it should be categorized correctly as a breaking change in the changelog when titling the PR as fix(gql)!: conform GraphQL span name to spec, so maybe changing the title could help.

[naseemkullah]

+1 Changelogs are created automatically on release PRs.
Other than emphasizing it in the changelog and bumping major(which we cannot do, because 0.x), I don't know how to make it more clear, especially since we're fixing spec noncompliance.

I also think there's nothing we can do to make it clearer. I think it should be categorized correctly as a breaking change in the changelog when titling the PR as fix(gql)!: conform GraphQL span name to spec, so maybe changing the title could help.

Thanks, I was unsure whether this was considered breaking or not since, as @rauno56 mentioned, we are adhering to spec. In any case ! added as you suggested @pichlermarc.
I'll likely merge by Monday morning EST if there are no further concerns.

[pichlermarc]

Looks good 🙂