Skip to content

Add docs for resource out otel#2405

Open
cb645j wants to merge 4 commits into
fluent:masterfrom
cb645j:feature/opentelemetry_out_docs_resource
Open

Add docs for resource out otel#2405
cb645j wants to merge 4 commits into
fluent:masterfrom
cb645j:feature/opentelemetry_out_docs_resource

Conversation

@cb645j
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@cb645j cb645j commented Mar 2, 2026

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Added a configuration option to the OpenTelemetry output plugin to map a Resource attribute key for log messages (configurable, default: none), available in Fluent Bit and YAML configurations.
  • Documentation

    • Updated OpenTelemetry output plugin docs and examples to show the new configuration and how to map message resource attributes.

Review Change Stack

Signed-off-by: BOSLET, CORY <cb645j+ATT@att.com>
@cb645j cb645j requested review from a team and eschabell as code owners March 2, 2026 23:55
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

coderabbitai Bot commented Mar 2, 2026

Warning

Review limit reached

@eschabell, we couldn't start this review because you've reached your PR review rate limit.

More reviews will be available in 12 minutes and 56 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work.

Your organization has run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans include higher PR review limits than trial, open-source, and free plans. In all cases, reviews become available again over time. During sustained high-volume PR review activity, CodeRabbit may temporarily slow when the next review becomes available.

Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: ac4a9ba9-bba6-4f4e-b7b6-4de3fe233130

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 8294566 and 96c6a6b.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md
📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

A new configuration option logs_resource_attributes_message_key is added to the OpenTelemetry output plugin documentation (default _none_). The parameter table and Fluent Bit examples (YAML and fluent-bit.conf) were updated to include mappings for message resource attributes like application_id and service_name.

Changes

OpenTelemetry Output Configuration

Layer / File(s) Summary
Add parameter and update examples
pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md
Added new configuration option logs_resource_attributes_message_key (string, default: _none_) to the plugin parameter table and inserted corresponding entries in the Fluent Bit YAML and fluent-bit.conf examples (application_id, service_name).

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Suggested labels

5.0

Suggested reviewers

  • cosmo0920

Poem

🐰 A tiny key hops into place,
in docs it finds a tidy space,
logs_resource_attributes_message_key — so neat,
maps service and app to make logs complete,
a rabbit's cheer for telemetry grace!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Title check ❓ Inconclusive The title 'Add docs for resource out otel' uses abbreviated/unclear terms ('out', 'otel') that obscure the actual change, making it difficult to understand the specific documentation update without context. Consider clarifying the title to be more explicit, such as 'Add documentation for OpenTelemetry output plugin resource attributes' to make the change immediately understandable to reviewers.
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 3

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md`:
- Line 41: Update the param table row for logs_resource_attributes_message_key
so its description clearly states that this key names a message-field whose
value will be promoted into the OpenTelemetry Resource attributes (distinct from
logs_resource_metadata_key which maps metadata fields); replace the vague text
with an explicit phrase like “Specify the message field key whose value will be
promoted into the Resource attributes.”
- Line 139: The fluent-bit.conf example includes a new option that is missing
from the fluent-bit.yaml example; update the YAML example in
pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md (the fluent-bit.yaml code block around the
current examples) to include the equivalent key/value entry so both examples
demonstrate the same feature set—locate the fluent-bit.conf block to see the
exact option name and value, then add the matching YAML mapping/key under the
fluent-bit.yaml section with the same semantic setting and a brief inline
comment mirroring the conf example.
- Around line 189-190: Remove the invalid Fluent Bit OpenTelemetry output option
`logs_resource_attributes_message_key` and instead demonstrate configuring
resource attributes via a processors pipeline using the `opentelemetry_envelope`
processor with `content_modifier`; specifically, delete the two lines containing
`logs_resource_attributes_message_key application_id` and
`logs_resource_attributes_message_key service_name` and replace (or document)
using an `opentelemetry_envelope` processor block with `content_modifier` rules
to add/rename resource attributes for logs as per the OpenTelemetry processor
usage.

ℹ️ Review info

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between dc38f3c and d51e2fd.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md

Comment thread pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md Outdated
Comment thread pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md
Comment thread pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md Outdated
@eschabell eschabell self-assigned this Mar 3, 2026
@eschabell eschabell added waiting-on-code-merge waiting-on-review Waiting on a review from mainteners labels Mar 3, 2026
@eschabell
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@cb645j a few ai review issues to be solved please, see above comment.

@eschabell eschabell added the waiting-for-user Waiting for user/contributors feedback or requested changes label Mar 3, 2026
@eschabell
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@cb645j thanks for the updates, but it's now raised conflicts that I need you to resolve before I can review?

@eschabell eschabell added conflict Waiting on conflict to be resolved by contributor and removed waiting-for-user Waiting for user/contributors feedback or requested changes labels Mar 30, 2026
Signed-off-by: Eric D. Schabell <eric@schabell.org>
@eschabell
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@cb645j resolved the conflict, can you verify that your updates are intact?

@eschabell eschabell removed the conflict Waiting on conflict to be resolved by contributor label May 15, 2026
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@eschabell eschabell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cb645j cleaned up the conflict, can. you verify everything is intact you wanted to submit and address the changes listed below? Thanks for your patience and effort here!

Comment thread pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md Outdated
@eschabell eschabell added the waiting-for-user Waiting for user/contributors feedback or requested changes label May 26, 2026
…tes_message_key description

  - Replace vague "Specify a Resource key" with an explicit description
    stating the param names a message field key whose value is promoted
    into OpenTelemetry Resource attributes

  Applies to fluent#2405

Signed-off-by: Eric D. Schabell <eric@schabell.org>
@eschabell eschabell force-pushed the feature/opentelemetry_out_docs_resource branch from 5217d80 to 536da50 Compare May 28, 2026 06:40
@eschabell eschabell removed waiting-for-user Waiting for user/contributors feedback or requested changes waiting-on-review Waiting on a review from mainteners labels May 28, 2026
@eschabell
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@cb645j cleaned up all the issues with PR.

…message_key to YAML example

  - Add logs_resource_attributes_message_key list entries (application_id,
    service_name) to the fluent-bit.yaml code block to match the existing
    fluent-bit.conf example

  Applies to fluent#2405

Signed-off-by: Eric D. Schabell <eric@schabell.org>
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@eschabell eschabell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cb645j waiting on code PR merging.

Comment thread pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants