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

Use regular lock for simplespanprocessor #1612

Merged

Conversation

cijothomas
Copy link
Member

Fixes #1409

Changes

Match SimpleSpanProcessor to align with SimpleLogRecordProcessor.
Still haven't addressed this yet.

Merge requirement checklist

  • CONTRIBUTING guidelines followed
  • Unit tests added/updated (if applicable)
  • Appropriate CHANGELOG.md files updated for non-trivial, user-facing changes
  • Changes in public API reviewed (if applicable)

@cijothomas cijothomas requested a review from a team March 11, 2024 19:38
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 11, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 85.41667% with 7 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.0%. Comparing base (a34c5ee) to head (dd80d8a).

❗ Current head dd80d8a differs from pull request most recent head 7596bac. Consider uploading reports for the commit 7596bac to get more accurate results

Files Patch % Lines
opentelemetry-sdk/src/trace/span_processor.rs 86.2% 4 Missing ⚠️
...ntelemetry-sdk/src/testing/trace/span_exporters.rs 84.2% 3 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            main   #1612     +/-   ##
=======================================
- Coverage   67.0%   67.0%   -0.1%     
=======================================
  Files        138     138             
  Lines      19515   19479     -36     
=======================================
- Hits       13084   13058     -26     
+ Misses      6431    6421     -10     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@TommyCpp
Copy link
Contributor

Given the perf concern in #1409 I think it's worth call out explicitly in the comments of SimpleSpanProcessor that throughput may not be ideal and if one is looking for performance they should consider BatchSpanProcessor

@cijothomas
Copy link
Member Author

Given the perf concern in #1409 I think it's worth call out explicitly in the comments of SimpleSpanProcessor that throughput may not be ideal and if one is looking for performance they should consider BatchSpanProcessor

added for span and log processor.

Copy link
Contributor

@TommyCpp TommyCpp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@cijothomas cijothomas merged commit d5bf258 into open-telemetry:main Mar 12, 2024
14 of 15 checks passed
@cijothomas cijothomas deleted the cijothomas/simple-span-processor branch March 12, 2024 05:53
sreeo pushed a commit to sreeo/opentelemetry-rust that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Feature]: SimpleSpanProcessor to be consistent with SimpleLogRecordProcessor
3 participants