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

cloud.infrastructure_service incosistency #1377

Closed
pmm-sumo opened this issue Jan 26, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector-contrib#2556
Closed
Labels
area:semantic-conventions Related to semantic conventions priority:p3 Lowest priority level release:allowed-for-ga Editorial changes that can still be added before GA since they don't require action by SIGs spec:resource Related to the specification/resource directory

Comments

@pmm-sumo
Copy link
Contributor

Current state

Cloud semantic conventions specify fields such as:

  • cloud.provider (e.g. aws, azure)
  • cloud.infrastructure_service (e.g. aws_ec2, aws_ecs, azure_vm, etc.)

As can be observed, the values for the latter start with prefix that matches cloud.provider

Incosistency

However, OpenTelemetry Collector resourcedetection processor is using the names without prefix for cloud.infrastructure_service (e.g. EC2, ECS rather than aws_ec2, aws_ecs). Other providers do not support the new tag yet

Possible solutions

  • remove prefix from specification, since cloud.provider already provides this information
  • add prefix to the implementation to make it match the specification

This topic was to be discussed in a separate issue but eventually closed

Additional context.

#1059 suggests to make cloud.provider required if any other cloud.*attribute is set.

@pmm-sumo pmm-sumo added the spec:resource Related to the specification/resource directory label Jan 26, 2021
@Oberon00
Copy link
Member

This topic was to be discussed in a separate issue but eventually closed

This was discussed at #1112 (comment), i.e. on the PR that introduced this attribute. Quoting @arminru for why he suggested adding a prefix:

to avoid naming collisions and to allow for better organized sorting (e.g. in IDE suggestions). The proper display name to be used in UIs is provided in the brief anyway.

E.g. azure_vm was named as being more clear than just vm.

@Oberon00
Copy link
Member

I.e., I think the collector should follow the spec, and not the other way round.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:semantic-conventions Related to semantic conventions priority:p3 Lowest priority level release:allowed-for-ga Editorial changes that can still be added before GA since they don't require action by SIGs spec:resource Related to the specification/resource directory
Projects
None yet
3 participants