Set custom gRPC client/server span name extractor #5244
Conversation
| /** Sets the {@code peer.service} attribute for http client spans. */ | ||
| public void setPeerService(String peerService) { | ||
| public GrpcTracingBuilder setPeerService(String peerService) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fixing existing builder method
| * Sets custom client {@link SpanNameExtractor} | ||
| */ | ||
| public GrpcTracingBuilder setClientSpanNameExtractor( | ||
| SpanNameExtractor<? super GrpcRequest> clientSpanNameExtractor) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Instead of just passing the SpanNameExtractor, WDYT about passing a Function<SpanNameExtractor<GrpcRequest>, ? extends SpanNameExtractor<? super GrpcRequest>>? (similar to how the Armeria instrumentation allows modifying the SpanStatusExtractor)
With a transformer function you can still make use of the original span name extractors - or reject them altogether and return your own, if you wish to do so.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds interesting
Chaining status code transformations makes more sense imo than extracting span name (which is a string, doubt you'd like to have pattern matching on it)
Or what's the use case you have in mind? One could be if length is more that X use shorter version of method name; since default impl is pretty straight forward I'd stick to the current version, + it gives api consistency with other methods
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or what's the use case you have in mind? One could be if length is more that X use shorter version of method name;
That's one option. I was thinking of a case where you might decide to fall back on the default naming scheme based on the request, e.g. (request) -> shouldRename(request) ? customName(request) : originalSpanNameExtractor.extract(request)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@trask what do you think? current way as api consistency vs suggested flexibility?
I'm ok with both
There was a problem hiding this comment.
let's go with @mateuszrzeszutek's proposal, thx!
* Set custom gRPC client/server span name extractor * Fix imports * Fix compilation * Fix style rule * Update to use Functions instead * Fix formatting
Typical use case - set short operation name instead of full description name