-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 889
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
Should Tracers share all configuration objects with TracerFactory? #304
Comments
This is the current suggestion that whould go into the SDK specification:
|
This issue was resolved by PR #313, right? |
No, I don't think so: #313 (comment)
|
I think that by default all configs should be at Factory level and shared with all Tracers, and if needed we can allow special configs to be overwritten at Tracer level. |
Closing it, as it seems this was solved. Please re-open if this isn't the case. |
The introduction of "named tracers" brought up an interesting question around shared configuration objects (e.g.
SpanProcessors
).Currently, the specification states that
SpanProcessors
must be registered onTracer
instances (https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/master/specification/sdk-tracing.md#span-processor). With the introduction of named tracers, the logical counterpart for registering those would be theTracerFactory
.This however, brings up interesting questions:
Tracer
instances created by the sameTracerFactory
share the same configuration objects? If e.g. these configuration objects change during the creation of 2Tracers
, should only the latter "see" this changes or should the former one receive those as well?Tracer
expose operations to manipulate those objects (e.g. add anotherSpanProcessor
)?TracerFactory
and all otherTracers
created by it?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: