Open akheron opened 2 months ago
You should be able to use module without otel_exporter
today, if there are no explicit otel_trace
directives, which is quite close to the "worst" alternative above. Another "creative" workaround is to use dummy exporter (exporter errors do not block traffic processing) and/or set "forever" interval.
However, running without exporter or even with "logging exporter" won't be "the same code", as the bulk of module's logic is dedicated to gRPC export.
There might be some value in "logging exporter", but it seems rather limited, given otelcol project provides binaries for many platforms.
You should be able to use module without otel_exporter today, if there are no explicit otel_trace directives, which is quite close to the "worst" alternative above.
Thanks! I guess this suffices as a workaround for now.
However, running without exporter or even with "logging exporter" won't be "the same code", as the bulk of module's logic is dedicated to gRPC export.
Fair point.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe
For some use cases, it might be beneficial to use this module even without specifying an exporter at all, or "exporting" the traces by printing/logging.
Use cases:
Describe the solution you'd like
Don't require an
otel_exporter
section at all, or allow configuring a printing/logging exporter inotel_exporter
section.Describe alternatives you've considered
Alternatively, only require
otel_exporter
section iftracing on;
is used in alocation
block.tracing off;
would not require it. This is the "worst" option in my opinion, but would also be a workaround to allow enabling the module.Additional context
None