Restore compliance between Composite Samplers code and specs#8450
Conversation
The Composite Samplers based on Consistent Probability Sampling are described at https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/v1.57.0/oteps/trace/0250-Composite_Samplers.md
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #8450 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 91.02% 91.02%
Complexity 7817 7817
=========================================
Files 893 893
Lines 23719 23719
Branches 2364 2364
=========================================
Hits 21590 21590
Misses 1408 1408
Partials 721 721 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
zeitlinger
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with removing traceId from GetSamplingIntent and with the adjusted-count naming, but the OTEP still lists TraceId as a required Predicate argument. Is that part of the OTEP stale/inconsistent? If so, could you link the spec issue/PR or clarify the intended interpretation here?
Good catch! Yes, the OTEP (https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/v1.57.0/oteps/trace/0250-Composite_Samplers.md#predicate) lists |
The Composite Samplers based on Consistent Probability Sampling are described at https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/v1.57.0/oteps/trace/0250-Composite_Samplers.md