[exporter/<logs>] Update timestamp processing logic #9369
Conversation
| @@ -43,7 +43,11 @@ type logPacker struct { | |||
| func (packer *logPacker) LogRecordToEnvelope(logRecord plog.LogRecord) *contracts.Envelope { | |||
| envelope := contracts.NewEnvelope() | |||
| envelope.Tags = make(map[string]string) | |||
| envelope.Time = toTime(logRecord.Timestamp()).Format(time.RFC3339Nano) | |||
| timestamp := logRecord.Timestamp() | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I remember a conversation about adding an IsZero() function. Was it for pdata?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No consensus was reached to add IsZero, but it was clarified that the pdata representation of time is uint64, so checking with == 0 is correct.
| @@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ func resourceAndInstrumentationLogToEntry(resMap map[string]interface{}, log plo | |||
|
|
|||
| func timestampFromRecord(log plog.LogRecord) string { | |||
| if log.Timestamp() == 0 { | |||
| return timeNow().UTC().Format(timestampFieldOutputLayout) | |||
| return log.ObservedTimestamp().AsTime().UTC().Format(timestampFieldOutputLayout) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is ObservedTimestamp guaranteed to be non-zero?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
According to the specification, yes. But it's probably wise to check here in case there's a mistake upstream.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, that's right. I added check for zero observed timestamp to not break things
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @mar4uk. The code looks great, although I think Juraci has pointed out an instance where a zero-check would be warranted just in case.
…rved timestamp case
) * [exporter/<logs>] Update timestamp processing logic * [exporter/<logs>] Update timestamp processing logic. Handle zero observed timestamp case Co-authored-by: Daniel Jaglowski <[email protected]>
Description: Resolves #9130
Testing: Added unit tests