processor: add resource_attributes group in metadata.yaml files

[mackjmr]

Component(s)

k8sattributesprocessor, resourcedetectionprocessor

Describe the issue you're reporting

The group resource_attributes was introduced in the following PR.

As of today, no processors use the resource_attributes group and its generated config structs. What I'm proposing is adding the resource_attributes to processors where this is relevant:

• k8sattributesprocessor
• resourcedetectionprocessor

[mackjmr]

cc @dmitryax and @atoulme as you worked on the PR which added the ability to generate configs for resource attributes.

[github-actions]

Pinging code owners for cmd/mdatagen: @dmitryax. See Adding Labels via Comments if you do not have permissions to add labels yourself.

[github-actions]

Pinging code owners for processor/k8sattributes: @dmitryax @rmfitzpatrick @fatsheep9146. See Adding Labels via Comments if you do not have permissions to add labels yourself.

[github-actions]

Pinging code owners for processor/resourcedetection: @Aneurysm9 @dashpole. See Adding Labels via Comments if you do not have permissions to add labels yourself.

[dmitryax]

@mackjmr we already have an issue for resource detection processor #21482 which is in progress.

K8s attribute processor supports enabling/disabling the resource via a different configuration interface:

    extract:
      metadata:
        - k8s.namespace.name
        - k8s.node.name
        - k8s.pod.name
        - k8s.pod.uid
        - container.id
        - container.image.name
        - container.image.tag
      annotations:
        ...
      labels:
        ...

Not sure we should change it, it'll like be less intuitive, but we definitely can leverage the metadata.yaml with a comment that it's exposed through a different configuration interface. Feel free to submit an issue and work on it

[mackjmr]

Not sure we should change it, it'll like be less intuitive, but we definitely can leverage the metadata.yaml with a comment that it's exposed through a different configuration interface.

@dmitryax this approach makes sense to me, will open a separate issue specific to K8s attribute processor 👍

[mackjmr]

Opened an issue here, and linked it in the checkbox in the issue description. Will put up the PR as well.