-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
Resource Attrs + Operation based routing in loadbalancing exporter for traces #30146
Comments
Pinging code owners:
See Adding Labels via Comments if you do not have permissions to add labels yourself. |
That's surprising: balancing via trace ID should be relatively acceptable. I'd be curious to see the load-balancer metrics for that. Would you be able to share them?
Do you mind sharing more details about this? Which concrete values would you be using to improve the balancing? "Operation" (span name, I assume) cannot be used for the load balancing, as it would result in spans from the same trace reaching different backends. |
This issue has been inactive for 60 days. It will be closed in 60 days if there is no activity. To ping code owners by adding a component label, see Adding Labels via Comments, or if you are unsure of which component this issue relates to, please ping Pinging code owners:
See Adding Labels via Comments if you do not have permissions to add labels yourself. |
I'm closing, but if you have answers to the questions above, please comment and reopen. |
Component(s)
exporter/loadbalancing
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Right now, we have traceID and service based routing for traces in loadbalancing exporter. We see the traffic is unbalanced for both the routing types. We want to add a new entry for resource attributes+operation combination to balance the traffic across backends.
Describe the solution you'd like
Add a new entry key for resource attributes+operation routing and route the traffic based on the ids computed with resource attributes+operation combination
Describe alternatives you've considered
No response
Additional context
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: