Remove ILogger scope from the ASP.NET Core logging getting started doc

[reyang]

ILogger scope has introduced some confusion to folks who just want to get started.
This PR makes the getting-started doc simpler and cleaner.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (6250307) 83.38% compared to head (dea15b5) 83.18%.
Report is 25 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5254      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   83.38%   83.18%   -0.21%     
==========================================
  Files         297      271      -26     
  Lines       12531    11970     -561     
==========================================
- Hits        10449     9957     -492     
+ Misses       2082     2013      -69     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	?
unittests-Solution-Experimental	83.17% <100.00%> (?)
unittests-Solution-Stable	83.08% <100.00%> (?)

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

Files	Coverage Δ
...tation.AspNetCore/Implementation/HttpInListener.cs	89.72% <100.00%> (+0.14%)	⬆️
...AspNetCore/Implementation/HttpInMetricsListener.cs	89.47% <ø> (ø)
...plementation/HttpWebRequestActivitySource.netfx.cs	80.77% <100.00%> (ø)
...emetry/Metrics/Exemplar/SimpleExemplarReservoir.cs	80.43% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 34 files with indirect coverage changes

[noahfalk]

This looks fine to me.

fyi @davidfowl.

[davidfowl]

Why did we remove that?

This is what the aspire default template has:

builder.Logging.AddOpenTelemetry(logging =>
{
    logging.IncludeFormattedMessage = true;
    logging.IncludeScopes = true;
});

[noahfalk]

Because it appears to log a bunch of redundant data that OTel already knows how to capture. Do you believe there something important enough in there that it needs to be enabled by default?

#5239

[davidfowl]

Do you believe there something important enough in there that it needs to be enabled by default?

Yes, it going to stay the default in aspire.

I don't see any duplication in the aspire dashboard (OTLP endpoint). Maybe its a specific kind of app?

[cijothomas]

Here's the output from the getting-started app:

LogRecord.Timestamp:               2024-01-26T15:30:00.2604163Z
LogRecord.TraceId:                 7d63ba8a20f49c10982c966624c3bbf3
LogRecord.SpanId:                  fd093be1dff74bcf
LogRecord.TraceFlags:              None
LogRecord.CategoryName:            Program
LogRecord.Severity:                Info
LogRecord.SeverityText:            Information
LogRecord.Body:                    Food `{name}` price changed to `{price}`.
LogRecord.Attributes (Key:Value):
    name: artichoke
    price: 9.99
    OriginalFormat (a.k.a Body): Food `{name}` price changed to `{price}`.
LogRecord.EventId:                 344095174
LogRecord.EventName:               FoodPriceChanged
LogRecord.ScopeValues (Key:Value):
[Scope.0]:SpanId: fd093be1dff74bcf
[Scope.0]:TraceId: 7d63ba8a20f49c10982c966624c3bbf3
[Scope.0]:ParentId: 0000000000000000
[Scope.1]:ConnectionId: 0HN0UGEKB9KAE
[Scope.2]:RequestId: 0HN0UGEKB9KAE:00000001
[Scope.2]:RequestPath: /

Scopes are duplicating the spanid,traceid. And other attributes as well coming from asp.net components, which user may not want.

[davidfowl]

Is this specific to how the console log exporter in OTEL outputs the scopes?

[cijothomas]

Is this specific to how the console log exporter in OTEL outputs the scopes?

No. OTLP Exporter would have the same. (Only thing specific to console exporter is it prefixes "scope-depth", which is not done by OTLP Exporter)

[davidfowl]

I think this is fine to leave out in this sample but aspire is leaving it in 😄