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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Clarify metric stream, point and cardinality limit #3866

Open
reyang opened this issue Feb 7, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Clarify metric stream, point and cardinality limit #3866

reyang opened this issue Feb 7, 2024 · 0 comments
Assignees
@reyang
Labels
spec:metrics Related to the specification/metrics directory triage:accepted:ready-with-sponsor Ready to be implemented and has a specification sponsor assigned

Comments

@reyang
Copy link
Member

reyang commented Feb 7, 2024 •
edited
Loading

What are you trying to achieve?

The current specification mentioned Metric, Metric Point, Metric Stream and Timeseries, but not all of them are clearly defined. This has caused confusion, for example #3856.

I plan to make a series of changes to clarify these terms and correct the existing usage in the spec:

  1. The SDK level cardinality limit is the limit on the number of metric points during a collection cycle, not measurements.
  2. The SDK level cardinality limit applies to metrics (e.g. each metric can have its own cardinality limit).
  3. The SDK simply does not see metric streams. Metric streams are observed by the receiver (e.g. collector, backend).
  4. Concrete examples will be provided in the spec, which will help the reader to understand these terms.
@reyang reyang added the spec:metrics Related to the specification/metrics directory label Feb 7, 2024
@reyang reyang assigned reyang and unassigned jack-berg Feb 7, 2024
@reyang reyang mentioned this issue Feb 7, 2024
Merged
@jack-berg jack-berg added the [label deprecated] triaged-accepted [label deprecated] Issue triaged and accepted by OTel community, can proceed with creating a PR label Feb 14, 2024
This was referenced Feb 26, 2024
Merged
Closed
Merged
@dashpole dashpole mentioned this issue Mar 4, 2024
Closed
carlosalberto pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 13, 2024
@reyang
[Editorial] use "measurement" term across the metrics SDK spec (#3918)
79cf2d5 
Related to #3866.

The cardinality limit section in the SDK spec uses "metric event" and
"event" which could be confusing (especially considering we already have
span events and event API...). Given we already have "measurement"
clearly defined in the API spec, this PR helps to align on the
terminology.
@austinlparker austinlparker added triage:accepted:ready-with-sponsor Ready to be implemented and has a specification sponsor assigned and removed [label deprecated] triaged-accepted [label deprecated] Issue triaged and accepted by OTel community, can proceed with creating a PR labels Apr 30, 2024
@austinlparker austinlparker moved this to Spec - Accepted in 🔭 Main Backlog Jul 16, 2024
@austinlparker austinlparker moved this from Spec - Accepted to Spec - In Progress in 🔭 Main Backlog Jul 16, 2024
@reyang reyang mentioned this issue Sep 26, 2024
Merged
5 tasks
carlosalberto pushed a commit to carlosalberto/opentelemetry-specification that referenced this issue Oct 31, 2024
@reyang
[Editorial] use "measurement" term across the metrics SDK spec (open-…
ab84daf 
…telemetry#3918)

Related to open-telemetry#3866.

The cardinality limit section in the SDK spec uses "metric event" and
"event" which could be confusing (especially considering we already have
span events and event API...). Given we already have "measurement"
clearly defined in the API spec, this PR helps to align on the
terminology.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@reyang reyang

Labels
spec:metrics Related to the specification/metrics directory triage:accepted:ready-with-sponsor Ready to be implemented and has a specification sponsor assigned
Projects
🔭 Main Backlog
Status: Spec - In Progress
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@austinlparker @reyang @jack-berg