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

Spec how composite sampler works with legacy head-based sampling #4411

Open
yuanyuanzhao3 opened this issue Feb 10, 2025 · 0 comments
Open
Labels
sig-issue A specific SIG should look into this before discussing at the spec spec:trace Related to the specification/trace directory

Comments

@yuanyuanzhao3
Copy link
Contributor

What are you trying to achieve?
We want to clarify with an example of how head-based sampling works when an upstream legacy sampler makes sampling decisions in a way that is different from OTel consistent probabilistic sampler. As an example, such a legacy sampler may not specify a th value for the ot key in tracestate.

This would give guidance for people on how to configure their samplers in a mixed environment where services ownership is distributed among multiple teams and departments. A coordinated simultaneous upgrade of everything to OTel-compatible is not feasible. During the transitioning time, people will need to deal with the mixed setup and also have a way to obtain valid span metrics.

What did you expect to see?
We would like to see a clear specification, through an example on how the samplers can be configured at an OTel-instrumented service where the upstream sampler may not be OTel-compatible. We expect head-based decisions to be "respected*. There should be clarification on how the sampler output enables valid span metrics computation.

Additional context.

Add any other context about the problem here. If you followed an existing documentation, please share the link to it.

@yuanyuanzhao3 yuanyuanzhao3 added the spec:trace Related to the specification/trace directory label Feb 10, 2025
@trask trask added the sig-issue A specific SIG should look into this before discussing at the spec label Feb 11, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
sig-issue A specific SIG should look into this before discussing at the spec spec:trace Related to the specification/trace directory
Projects
Status: No status
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants