Closed aaron-ai closed 1 year ago
Overall good, although we don't have any actual semantic convention (for tracing) using a timestamp
value. Also, we need actual examples or doc references for some of these values (e.g. I didn't know about delay type, but I found this: https://rocketmq.apache.org/docs/4.x/producer/07message3/)
Also, let's discuss it in tomorrow's Spec call, to double confirm we are good with this. We will post an update if you can't make it.
Thanks for reply. We use either of delay_time_level
and delivery_timestamp
to determine the specified delay time for delay message, it depends on the version of RocketMQ client.
delay_time_level
: as you saw in https://rocketmq.apache.org/docs/4.x/producer/07message3delivery_timestamp
: here is an example: https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-clients/blob/master/java/client/src/main/java/org/apache/rocketmq/client/java/example/ProducerDelayMessageExample.java@jsuereth I was wondering whether you have any opinion regarding adding general trace attributes (special attention to the timestamp value).
Add more semantics convention attributes of Apache RocketMQ.
messaging.rocketmq.message_group
: message group is essential for FIFO message. Messages that belong to the same message group are always processed one by one within the same consumer group.messaging.rocketmq.delivery_timestamp
: the timestamp in milliseconds that the delay message is expected to be delivered to consumer.messaging.rocketmq.delay_time_level
: the delay time level for delay message, which determines the message delay time.