Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I have no reason to do so, because I don't believe that OpenTelemetry is a project that was created, or is maintained, in good faith to its stated goals.


Care to elaborate a bit more on the goals contrast?


https://opentelemetry.io

> OpenTelemetry is a collection of APIs, SDKs, and tools. Use it to instrument, generate, collect, and export telemetry data (metrics, logs, and traces) to help you analyze your software’s performance and behavior.

You can absolutely categorize telemetry into these high-level pillars, true. But the specifics on how that data is captured, exported, collected, queried, etc. is necessarily unique to each pillar, programming language, backend system, organization, etc.

That's because telemetry data is always larger than the original data it represents: a production request will be of some well-defined size, but the metadata about that request is potentially infinite. Consequently, the main design constraint for telemetry systems is always efficiency.

Efficiency requires specialization, which is in direct tension with features that generalize over backends and tools, e.g.

> Traces, Metrics, Logs -- Create and collect telemetry data from your services and software, then forward them to a variety of analysis tools.

and features that generalize over languages, e.g.

> Drop-In Instrumentation -- OpenTelemetry integrates with popular libraries and frameworks such as Spring, ASP.NET Core, Express, Quarkus, and more! Installation and integration can be as simple as a few lines of code.

I think OTel treats these goals -- which are very valuable to end users!! -- as inviolable core requirements, and then does whatever is necessary to implement them. But these goals are not actually valid, and so the resulting code is often inefficient, incoherent, or even unsound.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: