Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [microprofile-wg] [BALLOT][PLAN REVIEW]MicroProfile Telemetry 1.0

Hi Ed,

There is a more detailed document here that should be the basis for the specification on the MP side:

But it doesn’t answer your question.

I remember this being discussed in one of the calls, and I believe the decision is that you can only have one Tracing mechanism active (either OpenTracing or OpenTelemetry Tracing). In Quarkus, we only allow one to be active and this is also my recommendation for the MP Platform.

I guess that such behavior should be documented at the platform level.


On 16 Aug 2022, at 01:01, Edward Burns via microprofile-wg <microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Microsoft votes +1. We endorse the rewording of the bullet point on line 16 to match what Edwin Derks suggested in this comment.
I personally have a follow up question. From Microsoft’s perspective, we want things to be in Open Telemetry because that is well supported by Azure Application Insights.  On the other hand, I understand from previous specification experience that a behavior changing “implicit enabling” of a feature should be avoided, so I agree it makes sense to have Open Telemetry Tracing be an opt-in. Where is it specified what happens if users enable OpenTelemetry Tracing?  Does enabling Open Telemetry Tracing disable other kinds of tracing?
| edburns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx | office: +1 954 727 1095
| Calendar Booking:
| Please don't feel obliged to read or reply to this e-mail outside
| of your normal working hours.
microprofile-wg mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top