Skip to content

Feature request: tracer feature improvements #275

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

Closed
3 of 4 tasks
dreamorosi opened this issue Dec 8, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed
3 of 4 tasks

Feature request: tracer feature improvements #275

dreamorosi opened this issue Dec 8, 2021 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
completed This item is complete and has been merged/shipped feature-request This item refers to a feature request for an existing or new utility tracer This item relates to the Tracer Utility

Comments

@dreamorosi
Copy link
Contributor

dreamorosi commented Dec 8, 2021

Description of the feature request

Problem statement
While an initial implementation of the Tracer core package has been done there are a handful of features that are missing when compared with the Python version. Some of these features were implemented recently while others, due to the language difference, need to be implemented differently and for this reason where left out in the initial implementation.

Summary of the feature

  • Cold start annotation present for every invocation (#851). At the moment Tracer annotates only ColdStart = true during the first invocation.
  • Service name is added as an annotation (#861). At the moment Tracer uses the service name only as default namespace when adding metadata to traces.
  • Automatic traces for HTTP requests (Python version captures all libraries). At the moment Tracer (supports this) only via explicit opt-in using the escape hatch mechanism.
  • Reusing tracer across your code (Python version implements Singleton pattern). At the moment every new Tracer() returns a completely new instance, JS/TS could implement it like so.
    ⬆️ We are opting to not introduce this feature in order to not force this pattern on every customer. See this comment.

Code examples
N/A

Benefits for you and the wider AWS community
Same behaviour as other Powertools libraries & better DX

Describe alternatives you've considered
N/A

Additional context

Related issues, RFCs

@dreamorosi dreamorosi added enhancement tracer This item relates to the Tracer Utility labels Dec 8, 2021
@dreamorosi dreamorosi added this to the production-ready-release milestone Dec 8, 2021
@dreamorosi dreamorosi changed the title (tracer): Feature improvements tracer: Feature improvements Dec 8, 2021
@dreamorosi
Copy link
Contributor Author

An additional potential improvement/change might come out from the discussion about whether or not this version of Powertools can/should patch AWS SDK clients.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

⚠️ COMMENT VISIBILITY WARNING ⚠️

Comments on closed issues are hard for our team to see.
If you need more assistance, please either tag a team member or open a new issue that references this one.
If you wish to keep having a conversation with other community members under this issue feel free to do so.

@dreamorosi dreamorosi added feature-request This item refers to a feature request for an existing or new utility completed This item is complete and has been merged/shipped labels Nov 14, 2022
@dreamorosi dreamorosi changed the title tracer: Feature improvements Feature request: tracer feature improvements Nov 14, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
completed This item is complete and has been merged/shipped feature-request This item refers to a feature request for an existing or new utility tracer This item relates to the Tracer Utility
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants