-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 167
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
What to do about config options & schema versions #1483
Comments
hi @hannahramadan! it sounds like
|
Thank you for the quick response @trask ◡̈ Outside of controlling which conventions to use for all database conventions, we want to provide users with a config option whether to send a specific attribute or not. The concern is around tying config options to a specific schema version. Should users be able to configure, for example, both |
yeah, I'd personally suggest sticking with the simple |
It seems like @hannahramadan does that help you? Can we close this issue? |
Looking for some guidance.
The OTel Ruby agent is adding a configuration option (and I believe already has some) that are tied to older semconv naming conventions. When introducing new configs options and perhaps cleaning up old ones, I'm looking for guidance on what the config should be named/ if both should be recognized.
For example, a config would exist if users wanted to receive information on the table name of sql queries. The old semantic convention for this is
db.sql.table
, and the new name isdb.collection.name
. The configuration might look likedb_sql_table
anddb_collection_name
, which the option toomit
orinclude
.Should we support both
db_sql_table
anddb_collection_name
and have them named as such or is there a better path forward.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: