[Exporter.Geneva] Opt in resources #3552

mattsains · 2025-11-20T18:26:22Z

This is a re-submission of #3367 , after @cijothomas recommend that it should be re-introduced.

I did change the name of the config option to WithResourceAttributes to match the Rust option in the user events log exporter

I also changed the logic when this field is not provided. The default is now to include no resource attributes except for mapped fields (eg., service.name -> Part A cloud extension)

Changes

Allows users of the Geneva exporter to specify which resource attributes they want sent to Geneva. This prevents excessive trace data from being exported if there are many resource attributes which do not need to be stored.

Merge requirement checklist

CONTRIBUTING guidelines followed (license requirements, nullable enabled, static analysis, etc.)
Unit tests added/updated
Appropriate CHANGELOG.md files updated for non-trivial changes
Changes in public API reviewed (if applicable)

cijothomas · 2025-11-20T18:31:42Z

src/OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Geneva/GenevaExporterOptions.cs

+    /// WantedResourceAttributes specifies which resource attribute fields should be sent to Geneva.
+    ///
+    /// Any resource attributes not in WantedResourceAttributes are ignored.
+    /// If WantedResourceAttributes is not provided, all resource attributes will be sent to Geneva.


all will be sent or none will be sent?

In my opinion, it should be none, so the behavior is back-compatible. To get resource attributes, users must explicitly opt-in.

if a customer really wants all resource attributes, how might they accomplish that? By the way, there is a feature flag which is default off that controls this feature

I've made the change you requested

do you think the special resource attributes, service.name and service.instanceId, which are mapped to part A cloud extension, should also be affected by WithResourceAttributes being set to null?

By the way, there is a feature flag which is default off that controls this feature

I am not sure if we need to feature flag this at all. The WithResourceAttribute is sufficient on its own right?

if a customer really wants all resource attributes, how might they accomplish that?

By listing each attribute. Not ideal, but I also don't think this will be the common case with GenevaExporter. If there is strong need for such a capability, we can introduce a boolean 'with_all_resource`/similar that adds all attributes effectively ignore WithResourceAttributes. Alternatively, "*" can be used to mean - get all attributes - we do such thing elsewhere in GenevaExporter.

I can remove the feature flag in a future PR

codecov · 2025-11-20T18:38:04Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 94.44444% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 71.20%. Comparing base (48d18f6) to head (5255e5d).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...er.Geneva/Internal/MsgPack/MsgPackTraceExporter.cs	95.08%	3 Missing ⚠️
...Telemetry.Exporter.Geneva/GenevaExporterOptions.cs	87.50%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3552      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   71.22%   71.20%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         442      442              
  Lines       17516    17520       +4     
==========================================
  Hits        12475    12475              
- Misses       5041     5045       +4

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests-Exporter.Geneva	`53.73% <94.44%> (-0.05%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...enTelemetry.Exporter.Geneva/GenevaTraceExporter.cs	`82.05% <100.00%> (-0.45%)`	⬇️
...xporter.Geneva/Internal/ConnectionStringBuilder.cs	`92.85% <ø> (-0.15%)`	⬇️
...rter.Geneva/Internal/MsgPack/MsgPackLogExporter.cs	`92.37% <100.00%> (+0.06%)`	⬆️
...Telemetry.Exporter.Geneva/GenevaExporterOptions.cs	`89.18% <87.50%> (-1.06%)`	⬇️
...er.Geneva/Internal/MsgPack/MsgPackTraceExporter.cs	`93.31% <95.08%> (-0.83%)`	⬇️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

cijothomas · 2025-11-25T23:48:57Z

src/OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Geneva/Internal/MsgPack/MsgPackTraceExporter.cs

                }
            }

+            if (!isDedicatedField && (this.WithResourceAttributes == null || !this.WithResourceAttributes.Contains(entry.Key)))


shouldn't we short-circuit this entire method if this.WithResourceAttributes == null ?

I decided that service.name and service.instanceId fields should still be used even if they're not explicitly mentioned in WithResourceAttributes, because they have a special mapping into part A cloud extension. So I don't believe the code should skip this section if it is one of those two resource attributes

src/OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Geneva/GenevaExporterOptions.cs

cijothomas · 2025-11-25T23:51:07Z

src/OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Geneva/GenevaExporterOptions.cs

+    /// Any resource attributes not in WithResourceAttributes are ignored.
+    /// If WithResourceAttributes is not provided, no resource attributes will be sent to Geneva.
+    /// </summary>
+    public IEnumerable<string>? WithResourceAttributes { get; set; }


nit: is this still controlled by a feature flag in connection string?

please refer to this previous conversation: #3552 (comment)

rajkumar-rangaraj · 2025-11-26T17:39:26Z

src/OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Geneva/GenevaExporterOptions.cs

+    /// Any resource attributes not in WithResourceAttributes are ignored.
+    /// If WithResourceAttributes is not provided, no resource attributes will be sent to Geneva.
+    /// </summary>
+    public IEnumerable<string>? WithResourceAttributes { get; set; }


Should this be --> public IEnumerable? WithResourceAttributes { get; init; }

Also, AllowedResourceAttributes or ResourceAttributeFilter naming might fit better here. No strong preference will leave it to you.

sure - would you like me to do the same to PrepopulatedFields?

…utes is not set

github-actions · 2025-12-04T03:36:47Z

This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 7 days.

github-actions bot added the comp:exporter.geneva Things related to OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Geneva label Nov 20, 2025

cijothomas reviewed Nov 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

mattsains marked this pull request as ready for review November 20, 2025 18:57

mattsains requested a review from a team as a code owner November 20, 2025 18:57

github-actions bot assigned rajkumar-rangaraj and xiang17 Nov 20, 2025

github-actions bot requested review from rajkumar-rangaraj and xiang17 November 20, 2025 19:04

Kielek changed the title ~~Opt in resources~~ [Exporter.Geneva] Opt in resources Nov 21, 2025

cijothomas reviewed Nov 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Geneva/GenevaExporterOptions.cs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cijothomas reviewed Nov 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

rajkumar-rangaraj reviewed Nov 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

mattsains added 9 commits December 3, 2025 11:15

add WantedResourceAttributes option

1210fc5

PR self-reference

536d17a

rename to WithResourceAttributes

d0577a2

update PR number

483ac72

seriously...

0af3131

insane

d417d80

change behaviour to send no resource attributes if WithResourceAttrib…

7026e5c

…utes is not set

lint

4e66e2b

always allow mapped resource attributes, and fix tests

ede742b

github-actions bot added the Stale label Dec 4, 2025

mattsains added 3 commits December 4, 2025 12:36

wip

e545369

ready for PR I think

1c08198

change set to init

5385b5e

mattsains force-pushed the opt-in-resources branch from 90ce62b to 5385b5e Compare December 4, 2025 22:04

fix version

b7d1200

fix readme and test

5255e5d

github-actions bot removed the Stale label Dec 5, 2025

[Exporter.Geneva] Opt in resources #3552

Are you sure you want to change the base?

[Exporter.Geneva] Opt in resources #3552

Uh oh!

Conversation

mattsains commented Nov 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Changes

Merge requirement checklist

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mattsains Nov 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Nov 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Dec 4, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

mattsains commented Nov 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mattsains Nov 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Nov 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading