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.

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

[component] Add service.namespace semantic convention to component.BuildInfo #12505

Open
dpaasman00 opened this issue Feb 26, 2025 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #12508
Open

[component] Add service.namespace semantic convention to component.BuildInfo #12505

dpaasman00 opened this issue Feb 26, 2025 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #12508
Assignees

Comments

@dpaasman00
Copy link
Contributor

Component(s)

No response

Describe the issue you're reporting

Problem:
In OpAMP we use Identifying Attributes to help differentiate collectors. These attributes are based on a set of Resource Semantic Conventions. Currently all of these conventions except service.namespace are reported via the OpAMP extension. The addition of service.namespace would enable OpAMP servers to better differentiate collector types rather than relying on just service.name and service.version. service.name and service.version are insufficient on their own because service.name is set to the collector binary name which has a high chance of being the same across distributions.

Solution:
Add a new field to component.BuildInfo called Namespace. All components would have access to this new field, specifically the OpAMP extension. By default this value would be set to "opentelemetry". The OCB should also be updated with a new configuration parameter, distribution.namespace, to facilitate setting this value.

Context:
There was a previous issue that aimed to solve this, but service.namespace wasn't added. Looking at the issue and PR there doesn't appear to be any reason why not.

@djaglowski
Copy link
Member

This makes sense to me.

@dpaasman00
Copy link
Contributor Author

@open-telemetry/collector-approvers Can this get assigned to me, thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants