Reconsider required
property for process.*
semantic conventions
#997
Labels
area:semantic-conventions
Related to semantic conventions
priority:p3
Lowest priority level
release:allowed-for-ga
Editorial changes that can still be added before GA since they don't require action by SIGs
spec:miscellaneous
For issues that don't match any other spec label
Currently we define
process.pid
and "at least one ofprocess.executable.name
,process.executable.path
,process.command
, orprocess.command_line
" as required, if any resource attribute in the process namespace is present. I don't think this is a sensible requirement, since there are multiple concerns (or multiple features from a backend's perspective) mixed together in the process namespace. I could well imagine that one might want to report the runtime (added in #882) but has no need for reporting the PID and/or the entire commmand line. This would currently not be "legal", however.I think we should drop the entire
required
column for the process namespace.This is related to #653. I do, however, think of the trace semantic conventions more as distinct features, where defining some set of attributes as essential to provide some reasonable output makes more sense than for the process resource attributes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: