janhoy commented on PR #1841:
URL: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/1841#issuecomment-1681360684
Yes, splitting out the otel version upgrade is a good idea!
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL ab
janhoy commented on PR #1841:
URL: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/1841#issuecomment-1680314430
Wrt documentation. As long as the user-facing config and env vars are the
same, and the spans created are almost identical, I think the only Ref-guide
documentation to add is in "Major change
janhoy commented on PR #1841:
URL: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/1841#issuecomment-1680279442
I reproduced the thread leak locally, but it does not happen every time.
Also, the new Crave test run was successful. Looks like there is a timing
issue. @stillalex how is the tracer life cyc
janhoy commented on PR #1841:
URL: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/1841#issuecomment-1680170683
> if this is for 2 fields only (`http.status_code` =>
`http.response.status_code` and `http.method` => `http.request.method`) it
feels like overkill to implement this mechanism. I would emit
janhoy commented on PR #1841:
URL: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/1841#issuecomment-1679714260
> * 9.3 spans have `http.status_code` attrib, where PR has `http.status`
Please consult the [otel semantic
conventions](https://github.com/open-telemetry/semantic-conventions/tree/main/
