Skip to content

Add doc_url field to match its recent addition in pprof proto.#588

Closed
aalexand wants to merge 2 commits intoopen-telemetry:mainfrom
aalexand:doc-link
Closed

Add doc_url field to match its recent addition in pprof proto.#588
aalexand wants to merge 2 commits intoopen-telemetry:mainfrom
aalexand:doc-link

Conversation

@aalexand
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@aalexand aalexand commented Sep 12, 2024

google/pprof/pull/888 added this field in pprof proto, this change adds it to the OTel profiling proto to match the change.

github.com/google/pprof/pull/888 added this field in pprof proto, this
change adds it to the OTel profiling proto to match the change.
@aalexand aalexand requested review from a team September 12, 2024 00:16
@aalexand
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@florianl @jhalliday FYI

Comment thread opentelemetry/proto/profiles/v1experimental/pprofextended.proto Outdated
//
// The URL may be missing if the profile was generated by older code or code
// that did not bother to supply a link.
int64 doc_url = 19; // Index into string table.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

With ScopeProfiles.schema_url the URL that describes the provided profile exists already. Where do you see the differences between the two, so that this additional field is required?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

schema_url points to https://opentelemetry.io/docs/specs/otel/schemas/#schema-url file which is not user docs. The doc_url here is for user-level documentation. I would also expect that the schema URL would be the same for many profiles as it corresponds to the version of the data schema or something like that rather than the nature of the data (CPU profile vs heap profile vs contention profile).

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@christos68k christos68k Sep 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since this should be an optional field, what do you think about using an attribute?

On a similar note, we had a discussion in the last SIG about the boolean fields in Mapping and the consensus was to drop them from the proto and turn them into attributes.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think the doc_url can be an attribute. I'll change this.

For the has_* fields I'm less sure. I added an agenda topic to the SIG notes doc with some thoughts on this.

Co-authored-by: Florian Lehner <florianl@users.noreply.github.com>
tigrannajaryan pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 15, 2024
… ProfileContainer. (#590)

This change removes the now unnecessary split of the profiling format between two files, combining them into one as with other protocols. In the process, the likewise unnecessary ProfileContainer message type is removed and its fields merged into Profile, saving one level of indirection.

Note this as discussed on slack otel-profiles, this is effectively a minimal subset of the now defunct #587, remaining parts of which will be resubmitted in subsequent PRs.  This PR effectively blocks any concurrent changes to pprofextended.proto e.g. #588 as git won't track such changes across the file 'merge'.
@aalexand
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

aalexand commented Nov 1, 2024

We decided to make this an attribute instead.

@aalexand aalexand closed this Nov 1, 2024
@aalexand aalexand deleted the doc-link branch November 1, 2024 19:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants