search

openzipkin / zipkin-browser-extension

Chrome and Firefox browser extensions for Zipkin
Apache License 2.0
25 stars 13 forks source link

Support flexible traceId formats #12

Open danielkwinsor opened 7 years ago

danielkwinsor commented 7 years ago

Related to #3 Originally, zipkin only supported 64 bits, but newer versions support 128 bit traceIds. Anecdotally, our server supports only 128 bit UUID v4 style traceIds, and crashed (now fixed) when passed this 64 bit style. For me, supporting this is not required, but filing this issue as a nice-to-have.

codefromthecrypt commented 7 years ago

Uuid format isnt B3 compatible, so I guess the root concern here is to support an alternate propagation format (knowing it wont be compatible with libraries that use B3)

https://github.com/openzipkin/b3-propagation

In brave (v4) we have a propagation type that allows B3 to be swapped out.

https://github.com/openzipkin/brave/blob/master/brave/src/main/java/brave/propagation/Propagation.java

Maybe you can detail the alternate propagation format you are using? It would be good for tests.

On 24 Mar 2017 06:02, "danielkwinsor" notifications@github.com wrote:

Related to #3 https://github.com/openzipkin/zipkin-browser-extension/issues/3 Originally, zipkin only supported 64 bits, but newer versions support 128 bit traceIds. Anecdotally, our server supports only 128 bit UUID v4 style traceIds, and crashed (now fixed) when passed this 64 bit style. For me, supporting this is not required, but filing this issue as a nice-to-have.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openzipkin/zipkin-browser-extension/issues/12, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAD612WEjwrXn7Sa9PMqvlTqLTfib30Wks5rouvkgaJpZM4MnbAp .

danielkwinsor commented 7 years ago

Looks like I conflated 2 issues; 128 bitness and UUID. I know you are aware about the 128 bit support, for good reason. We used a modified Brave v2.x with UUID support, and https://github.com/cogitate/twitter-zipkin-uuid also exists - no relation.

codefromthecrypt commented 7 years ago

Just thinking this through and I have a couple thoughts one is tangental.

If we had a custom means for trace id format, we would need to allow someone to select it or input it somehow. For example B3-64bit, B3-128bit, B3-uuid (last isnt actually defined but i understand you need it.. not sure we want to promote this one)

The tangent is that recent versions of zipkin can store 128bit trace ids so you could consider that. While the json format doesnt use uuid and storage dont by default you might be able to reduce maintenance that way. The UI doesnt accept UUID format in the goto screen, but I imagine a smaller fork could be made to add/remove hyphens.

Food for thought

On 25 Mar 2017 1:07 am, "danielkwinsor" notifications@github.com wrote:

Looks like I conflated 2 issues; 128 bitness and UUID. I know you are aware about the 128 bit support, for good reason. We used a modified Brave v2.x with UUID support, and https://github.com/cogitate/twitter-zipkin-uuid also exists - no relation.

— You are receiving this because you commented.

Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openzipkin/zipkin-browser-extension/issues/12#issuecomment-289083427, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAD612FWbcXsxXwG9x7-EaBk98now8FQks5ro_hpgaJpZM4MnbAp .