-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
Add blog covering complex attributes #8127
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
277c6ac to
2f10a42
Compare
Co-authored-by: Severin Neumann <severin.neumann@altmuehlnet.de> Co-authored-by: Trask Stalnaker <trask.stalnaker@gmail.com>
d2bfd2c to
a10c66f
Compare
a10c66f to
cebea1c
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pull Request Overview
This PR introduces a new blog post announcing support for complex attribute types across all OpenTelemetry signals. The post explains the expansion of support for maps, heterogeneous arrays, byte arrays, and empty values beyond logs to include metrics and traces.
Key changes:
- New blog post explaining the rationale and use cases for complex attribute types
- Guidance for backend implementers on handling complex attributes
- Best practices for when to use complex vs. flat attributes
Co-authored-by: Robert Pająk <pellared@hotmail.com>
ddbb4d7 to
baf54a1
Compare
Co-authored-by: Trask Stalnaker <trask.stalnaker@gmail.com>
| --- | ||
| title: Announcing Support for Complex Attribute Types in OTel | ||
| linkTitle: Announcing Support for Complex Attribute Types in OTel | ||
| date: 2025-10-25 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TODO
|
/fix:refcache |
|
✅ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
|
@open-telemetry/docs-approvers could someone please take a look? thanks! PS: we (Logs SIG) would like to merge it before KubeCon (next week) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the ping, @lmolkova! This post looks great to me. One small change: I think headings work better in the "alternatives" section, so I've made those suggestions.
We should be able to get this published tomorrow.
| Before extending support for complex attributes to all signals, we explored | ||
| several alternatives: | ||
|
|
||
| **Limiting support to logs (and spans).** |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
| **Limiting support to logs (and spans).** | |
| ### Limiting support to logs (and spans) |
| Having different attribute collection types for different signals affects API | ||
| ergonomics, making it less convenient and efficient to work with attributes. | ||
|
|
||
| **Flattening.** |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
| **Flattening.** | |
| ### Flattening |
|
|
||
| Both approaches are limited and lead to a poor user experience. | ||
|
|
||
| **String serialization.** |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
| **String serialization.** | |
| ### String serialization |
| --- | ||
| title: Announcing Support for Complex Attribute Types in OTel | ||
| linkTitle: Announcing Support for Complex Attribute Types in OTel | ||
| date: 2025-10-25 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
| date: 2025-10-25 | |
| date: 2025-11-05 |
Following up on open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#4485
we want to get more eyes from the OTel community on expanding complex attribute support across all signals.
/cc @trask @pellared @austinlparker