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

.count metric naming convention only applies to UpDownCounters #3493

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

trask
Copy link
Member

@trask trask commented May 9, 2023

Fixes #3457

Changes

Updates .count metric naming convention so that it only applies to UpDownCounters, and adds that .total should not be used by either Counters or UpDownCounters

@trask trask force-pushed the count-v-total branch 2 times, most recently from 71d6af9 to 45c2c20 Compare May 9, 2023 22:18
Copy link
Member

@reyang reyang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

trask and others added 2 commits May 9, 2023 15:51
Co-authored-by: Reiley Yang <reyang@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Reiley Yang <reyang@microsoft.com>
@trask trask marked this pull request as ready for review May 9, 2023 22:51
@trask trask requested review from a team May 9, 2023 22:51
@reyang reyang added the area:semantic-conventions Related to semantic conventions label May 9, 2023
@@ -114,7 +115,7 @@ should not be pluralized, even if many data points are recorded.
* `system.paging.faults`, `system.disk.operations`, and `system.network.packets`
should be pluralized, even if only a single data point is recorded.

#### Use `count` Instead of Pluralization
#### Use `count` Instead of Pluralization for UpDownCounters
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why keep this around for UpDownCounters? This section appears to include the only mentions of a metrics namespace. Getting rid this rule altogether would mean getting rid of a confusing and poorly defined concept.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oops I found namespace mentioned in the General Guidelines section as well.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Getting rid this rule altogether would mean getting rid of a confusing and poorly defined concept.

I'd suggest let's start with this more obvious fix, and revisit removing the rule altogether depending on the outcome of #3476/#3477 (there are good arguments on both sides of that debate currently)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Or maybe we decide which approach to take with the namespace, then we might not even need this? 🤔. I agree with @jack-berg I find the rules around this very confusing.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should address this separately. Approved and voted for #3477.

trask and others added 3 commits May 9, 2023 16:31
Co-authored-by: Tyler Yahn <MrAlias@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Tyler Yahn <MrAlias@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Tyler Yahn <MrAlias@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Member

@gouthamve gouthamve left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@jsuereth jsuereth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a step in the right direction.

I'm supportive of this. I like what @jack-berg suggests, but I'm also a fan of merging this as-is and going further in the future.

Copy link
Contributor

@jsuereth jsuereth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This PR needs to move to the Semantic Conventions repository.

@github-actions
Copy link

This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 7 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label May 19, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

Closed as inactive. Feel free to reopen if this PR is still being worked on.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:semantic-conventions Related to semantic conventions Stale
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Use total instead of count in the metrics semantic conventions
9 participants