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

Add RO/RW span interfaces #1360

Merged
merged 10 commits into from Dec 11, 2020

Conversation

johananl
Copy link
Contributor

General

This PR refactors the way we handle access to span data in the SDK.

Fixes #1326.

Reviewing this PR commit by commit can be easier.

This PR touches code in the "critical path" of the SDK. I suggest we keep the following in mind when reviewing:

  • We should ensure we aren't making performance worse by merging this.
  • We should verify the set of methods under ReadOnlySpan make sense: Are we exposing everything which might need to be read? Are we exposing anything unnecessary?

Rationale

The spec defines multiple interfaces for interacting with spans. These interfaces make a clear distinction between the following:

  • Places in the codebase where a span should only be written to.
  • Places in the codebase where a span should only be read from.
  • Places in the codebase where a span might have to be either read from or written to.

This change improves the way we control access to the various fields of a span struct in the SDK.

In addition, this change explicitly designates export.SpanData as a read-only snapshot of a span. Following this change, export.SpanData instances are no longer modified after creation and are used solely for exporting spans.

Summary of changes

  • Store all span data directly in the span struct.
  • Add a ReadOnlySpan interface which matches the "readable span" concept from the spec.
  • Add a ReadWriteSpan interface which matches the "read/write span" concept from the spec.
  • Use the two interfaces above as appropriate instead of export.SpanData.

See the commit messages for more info about each change.

Testing

The easiest way to test this PR is to run the following unit tests:

cd sdk
go test -v ./trace -run TestReadOnlySpan
go test -v ./trace -run TestReadWriteSpan

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 20, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #1360 (eea2c3f) into master (61e07a0) will increase coverage by 0.0%.
The diff coverage is 93.8%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #1360   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage    77.9%   78.0%           
======================================
  Files         123     123           
  Lines        6202    6252   +50     
======================================
+ Hits         4836    4877   +41     
- Misses       1122    1126    +4     
- Partials      244     249    +5     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
exporters/otlp/internal/transform/span.go 98.0% <ø> (ø)
exporters/trace/zipkin/model.go 98.6% <ø> (ø)
exporters/stdout/trace.go 65.2% <50.0%> (ø)
sdk/trace/simple_span_processor.go 75.0% <66.6%> (+3.5%) ⬆️
sdk/trace/span.go 91.2% <93.5%> (-3.8%) ⬇️
exporters/otlp/otlp.go 83.5% <100.0%> (ø)
exporters/trace/jaeger/jaeger.go 84.6% <100.0%> (ø)
exporters/trace/zipkin/zipkin.go 73.6% <100.0%> (ø)
sdk/export/trace/tracetest/test.go 83.3% <100.0%> (ø)
sdk/trace/attributesmap.go 100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
... and 4 more

@johananl johananl force-pushed the johananl/span-interfaces branch 3 times, most recently from 8dd2834 to 1f7baaf Compare November 20, 2020 19:19
sdk/trace/attributesmap.go Show resolved Hide resolved
sdk/trace/span.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
sdk/trace/attributesmap.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@johananl johananl force-pushed the johananl/span-interfaces branch 3 times, most recently from 48ecb63 to b7a4b05 Compare November 23, 2020 15:49
@krnowak
Copy link
Member

krnowak commented Nov 23, 2020

The question that pops up is: Would it be ok to rename SpanData to something like SpanSnapshot? I realize that java implementation is calling it SpanData, but SpanSnapshot actually describes that thing better.

@johananl
Copy link
Contributor Author

The question that pops up is: Would it be ok to rename SpanData to something like SpanSnapshot? I realize that java implementation is calling it SpanData, but SpanSnapshot actually describes that thing better.

I agree SpanSnapshot would make things less ambiguous. I'd let some more folks weigh in before changing this though.

@Aneurysm9
Copy link
Member

The question that pops up is: Would it be ok to rename SpanData to something like SpanSnapshot? I realize that java implementation is calling it SpanData, but SpanSnapshot actually describes that thing better.

I agree that SpanSnapshot more clearly articulates that this is a point-in-time snapshot of the data. I'd also suggest changing Dump() to Snapshot() to more clearly align the method name with the type it produces.

sdk/trace/span.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
sdk/trace/span.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@johananl johananl force-pushed the johananl/span-interfaces branch 8 times, most recently from 405c468 to bd9bdfd Compare November 24, 2020 15:28
@johananl
Copy link
Contributor Author

Following the feedback above I've renamed SpanData to SpanSnapshot and span.Dump() to span.Snapshot().

- Nesting only some of a span's data in a `data` field (with the rest
  of the data living direclty in the `span` struct) is confusing.
- export.SpanData is meant to be an immutable *snapshot* of a span,
  not the "authoritative" state of the span.
- Refactor attributesMap.toSpanData into toKeyValue and make it
  return a []label.KeyValue which is clearer than modifying a struct
  passed to the function.
- Read droppedCount from the attributesMap as a separate operation
  instead of setting it from within attributesMap.toSpanData.
- Set a span's end time in the span itself rather than in the
  SpanData to allow reading the span's end time after a span has
  ended.
- Set a span's end time as soon as possible within span.End so that
  we don't influence the span's end time with operations such as
  fetching span processors and generating span data.
- Remove error handling for uninitialized spans. This check seems to
  be necessary only because we used to have an *export.SpanData field
  which could be nil. Now that we no longer have this field I think we
  can safely remove the check. The error isn't used anywhere else so
  remove it, too.
The spec requires that the parent field of a Span be a Span, a
SpanContext or null.

Rather than extracting the parent's span ID from the trace.SpanContext
which we get from the tracer, store the trace.SpanContext as is and
explicitly extract the parent's span ID where necessary.
Use this interface instead of export.SpanData in places where reading
information from a span is necessary. Use export.SpanData only when
exporting spans.
Use this interface instead of export.SpanData in places where it is
necessary to read information from a span and write to it at the same
time.
SpanSnapshot represents the nature of this type as well as its
intended use more accurately.

Clarify the purpose of SpanSnapshot in the docs and emphasize what
should and should not be done with it.
"refreshes" is wrong for plural ("updates").
- Improve accuracy of span duration. Record span end time ASAP. We
  want to measure a user operation as accurately as possible, which
  means we want to mark the end time of a span as soon as possible
  after span.End() is called. Any operations we do inside span.End()
  before storing the end time affect the total duration of the span,
  and although these operations are rather fast at the moment they
  still seem to affect the duration of the span by "artificially"
  adding time between the start and end timestamps. This is relevant
  only in cases where the end time isn't explicitly specified.
- Remove redundant idempotence check. Now that IsRecording() is based
  on the value of span.endTime, IsRecording() will always return
  false after span.End() had been called because span.endTime won't
  be zero. This means we no longer need span.endOnce.
- Improve TestEndSpanTwice so that it also ensures subsequent calls
  to span.End() don't modify the span's end time.
@MrAlias
Copy link
Contributor

MrAlias commented Dec 3, 2020

@jmacd I think all your concerns have been addressed, can you please take another look?

@MrAlias MrAlias added this to In progress in OpenTelemetry Go RC via automation Dec 10, 2020
OpenTelemetry Go RC automation moved this from In progress to Reviewer approved Dec 11, 2020
@jmacd
Copy link
Contributor

jmacd commented Dec 11, 2020

Thanks @johananl

@MrAlias
Copy link
Contributor

MrAlias commented Dec 11, 2020

Holding off on including this in the v0.15.0 release so we can hope to address the changes for the sdk/trace/export/trace package all in one release.

@MrAlias MrAlias merged commit c3c4273 into open-telemetry:master Dec 11, 2020
OpenTelemetry Go RC automation moved this from Reviewer approved to Done Dec 11, 2020
@johananl johananl deleted the johananl/span-interfaces branch January 27, 2023 12:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
No open projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Align span interfaces with the spec
7 participants