You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The default variable OTEL_SERVICE_NAMEconfigures the resource attribute service.name. that's fine, but you're setting a default value when non is present. according to the spec this value is required, so I think it would be good to fail if this is not present.
second, I think that the library should respect the environment variables OTEL_SERVICE_VERSION and OTEL_SERVICE_NAMESPACE. it is already looking at service_version, then adding this into resource attribute service.version. I think, it would make sense to respect OTEL_SERVICE_VERSION (for service.version), as well as OTEL_SERVICE_NAMESPACE (for service.namespace).
let me know what you think of it @krzko, I could of course contribute the change.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The first one, I had it in the works already and will look to implement as per
MUST be the same for all instances of horizontally scaled services. If the value was not specified, SDKs MUST fallback to unknown_service: concatenated with process.executable.name, e.g. unknown_service:bash. If process.executable.name is not available, the value MUST be set to unknown_service
The second one also requires some alignment and cleaning up.
Nice catches and thanks for highlighting this. Hope to get some time work clean this up.
The default variable
OTEL_SERVICE_NAME
configures the resource attributeservice.name
. that's fine, but you're setting a default value when non is present. according to the spec this value is required, so I think it would be good to fail if this is not present.second, I think that the library should respect the environment variables
OTEL_SERVICE_VERSION
andOTEL_SERVICE_NAMESPACE
. it is already looking atservice_version
, then adding this into resource attributeservice.version
. I think, it would make sense to respectOTEL_SERVICE_VERSION
(forservice.version
), as well asOTEL_SERVICE_NAMESPACE
(forservice.namespace
).let me know what you think of it @krzko, I could of course contribute the change.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: