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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Fix ExponentialBucketHistogramAggregation #3978

Merged
merged 36 commits into from
Jul 18, 2024
Merged

Fix ExponentialBucketHistogramAggregation #3978

merged 36 commits into from
Jul 18, 2024

Conversation

ocelotl
Copy link
Contributor

@ocelotl ocelotl commented Jun 17, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Fixes #3977
Fixes #3974
Fixes #4037

This PR is analogous to #3429 and #4009

@ocelotl ocelotl self-assigned this Jun 17, 2024
@ocelotl ocelotl force-pushed the issue_3977 branch 4 times, most recently from 4d83990 to e8a9bc5 Compare June 24, 2024 17:18
@ocelotl ocelotl marked this pull request as ready for review June 25, 2024 23:48
@ocelotl ocelotl requested a review from a team June 25, 2024 23:48
@ocelotl ocelotl changed the title WIP Fix ExponentialBucketHistogramAggregation Jun 25, 2024
@ocelotl
Copy link
Contributor Author

ocelotl commented Jun 26, 2024

@euroelessar @rbtz-openai please take a look. This mainly fixes issues with start_time_unix_nano, but is is a necessary refactoring analogous to #3429.

@ocelotl ocelotl added the bug Something isn't working label Jun 26, 2024
@xrmx xrmx mentioned this pull request Jun 26, 2024
Closed
@ocelotl
Copy link
Contributor Author

ocelotl commented Jun 26, 2024

Note to reviewers: I recommend to check out this PR branch and compare it to main in separate windows to make it easier to understand what is going on here. I also strongly recommend to check out this PR branch and compare the implementation of aggregate and collect in the _ExplicitBucketHistogramAggregation and _ExponentialBucketHistogramAggregation classes. The former is simpler and you'll find out both are pretty much the same thing, the only main difference is the extra processing the latter does on its buckets to resize them while the former does not do that.

@ocelotl ocelotl force-pushed the issue_3977 branch 4 times, most recently from 4fdb18f to df23d88 Compare June 27, 2024 17:53
@ocelotl
Copy link
Contributor Author

ocelotl commented Jun 27, 2024

I have moved all variable renaming here.

xrmx
xrmx reviewed Jun 28, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@xrmx xrmx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Took a look at this but I fail to recognize the actual code change that fixes something 😓

@ocelotl
Copy link
Contributor Author

ocelotl commented Jun 28, 2024

Took a look at this but I fail to recognize the actual code change that fixes something 😓

I added a README.rst that explains the actual and expected results more clearly.

So, this PR fixes the issue with the wrong start_time_unix_nano values when the collection temporality is CUMULATIVE for the exponential bucket histogram aggregation. But remember that this PR is analogous to #3429 which fixed #3407 and #3089, so, we probably have the same issues reported in #3407 and #3089 but for the exponential histogram and the refactoring makes both the explicit and exponential bucket histogram aggregation implementations consistent.

@ocelotl ocelotl force-pushed the issue_3977 branch 2 times, most recently from 8a5b1a4 to 7332465 Compare July 3, 2024 16:34
xrmx
xrmx approved these changes Jul 9, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@xrmx xrmx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM but please wait for an ack from someone more clueful on histograms 😓

aabmass
aabmass reviewed Jul 11, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@aabmass aabmass left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just some comments related to the tests that I had forgotten to publish

opentelemetry-sdk/tests/metrics/integration_test/test_exponential_bucket_histogram.py Show resolved Hide resolved
opentelemetry-sdk/tests/metrics/integration_test/test_exponential_bucket_histogram.py Show resolved Hide resolved
opentelemetry-sdk/tests/metrics/integration_test/test_exponential_bucket_histogram.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@ocelotl ocelotl force-pushed the issue_3977 branch 2 times, most recently from bce6df1 to 4530d55 Compare July 11, 2024 19:07
@ocelotl ocelotl mentioned this pull request Jul 11, 2024
Closed
@ocelotl
Set scale in aggregate
5aa017b
@ocelotl
Use right values in exponential point
cfc3ee3
@ocelotl
Set scale right
2d6f7d4
@ocelotl
Start scale as None
8dc95a5
@ocelotl
Make test_collect_results_cumulative pass
460a4d2 
I am not sure these changes are right, I just wanted to find what would
be the value that would make this test case pass.
@ocelotl
Actually use random values
a9d4f59
@ocelotl
Add integration test for exponential histogram
5d588c3
@ocelotl
Handle all cases for current and previous buckets and scale
e4e144b
@ocelotl
Rename test module
17e0881
@ocelotl
Use random values
7a70730
@ocelotl
Fix bucket setting
8455bb0
@ocelotl
WIP integration test
0adc8e0
@ocelotl
WIP
e33e46a
@ocelotl
Finish integration tests
9ba466e
@ocelotl
Rename variables
056f93f
@ocelotl
Explain analogy with ExplicitBucket
526400a
@ocelotl
Add changelog and fix lint
cac0ef5
@ocelotl
Fix equality tests
b834964
@ocelotl
Fix location of returns
06bca7e
@ocelotl
Fix another issue and add test case
2ef5abd
@ocelotl
Added comments to integration test case
1aacf81
@ocelotl
Fix lint
374fb3b
@ocelotl
Add documentation for test case
2954641
@ocelotl
Copy link
Contributor Author

ocelotl commented Jul 18, 2024

Agreed to merge this in the SIG, since this is urgent and needed for the release.

@ocelotl ocelotl merged commit e78675e into open-telemetry:main Jul 18, 2024
284 checks passed
@ocelotl ocelotl deleted the issue_3977 branch July 18, 2024 19:10
@lzchen
Copy link
Contributor

lzchen commented Jul 19, 2024

@aabmass

Feel free to make additional comments/approve the changes separately.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@emdneto emdneto emdneto left review comments

@aabmass aabmass aabmass left review comments

@xrmx xrmx xrmx approved these changes

Assignees

@ocelotl ocelotl

Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
5 participants
@ocelotl @lzchen @xrmx @aabmass @emdneto