Skip to content

added ordering rationale: #158

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 23, 2018
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
16 changes: 16 additions & 0 deletions trace_context/HTTP_HEADER_FORMAT_RATIONALE.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -31,6 +31,22 @@ interfere with identification of the tracing system responsible for an entry.
- The typical name will be a single word in latin and the value will be a
copy of the `traceparent` format or an opaque string.

## Ordering of keys in `tracestate`

Specification calls for ordering of values in tracestate. This requirements allows better interoperability between tracing vendors.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this md file uses different line size based on whoever updates it. Probably makes sense to format the entire file using some rules. Maybe in a different PR. But at least in this PR use consistent line sizes please.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I noticed this as well. I wonder if there is a setting common between vim and vscode that will control it. I'll configure this for vscode.


Typical distributed trace is clustered - components calling each other often monitored
by the same tracing vendor. So information supplied by tracing system originated a
request will typically be less and less important deeper in distributed trace. Immediate
caller's information on other hand typically is more valuable as it is more likely being
monitored by the same tracing vendor. Thus it is logical to move immediate caller's
information to the beginning of the `tracestate` list. So less important values will be
pushed to the end of the list.

This prioritization of `tracestate` values improves performance of querying value of
tracestate - typically you only need a first pair. It also allows to meaningfully truncate
`tracestate` when required instead of dropping the entire list of values.

### Size limits

#### Total size limit
Expand Down