-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 554
feat: add methods to get Resource
set on in memory exporters
#3070
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
feat: add methods to get Resource
set on in memory exporters
#3070
Conversation
@@ -104,10 +105,10 @@ let counter = meter.u64_counter("my_counter").build(); | |||
- Replaced `global::meter_with_version` with `global::meter_with_scope` | |||
- Added `global::tracer_with_scope` | |||
- Refer to PR description for migration guide. | |||
- **Breaking change**: replaced `InstrumentationScope` public attributes by getters [#2275](https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust/pull/2275) |
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.
Sorry for the whitespace stripped in this file by my editor, let me know if this needs reverting.
Resource
set on in memory exportersResource
set on in memory exporters
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3070 +/- ##
=====================================
Coverage 80.1% 80.2%
=====================================
Files 126 126
Lines 21949 21979 +30
=====================================
+ Hits 17603 17634 +31
+ Misses 4346 4345 -1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust/blob/main/opentelemetry-sdk/src/logs/mod.rs#L119 This is a small change, so I am okay with it. Please see if the above solves the issue you are trying to address and the PR is really needed. |
Same/similar issue was reported #3068 (comment) too. |
Thanks for the review. So I think the confusion I had is that So I guess either we merge this to make it possible to access the resource in this (same) new way in both, or we should change to produce |
Changes
As per title.
I was testing my pipeline setup and found that there was no way to validate the resource was getting all the way to the exporter correctly (I had a bug in a
LogProcessor
which was not forwarding it correctly).If I had these methods, I'd be able to assert my pipeline was implemented correctly end-to-end.
Merge requirement checklist
CHANGELOG.md
files updated for non-trivial, user-facing changes