It's notable that Solr-core in main already includes OpenTelemetry
dependencies.  I expect this will be increasingly common, like SLF4J has
become.

Docker:  definitely a separate topic altogether.  See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17653 which I'm likely to
pursue.  I'm very familiar with running Solr in Docker in integration tests.

On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 10:47 AM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

> This sounds good to me because Dropwizard metrics is used by the Dropwizard
> framework. Recent experiences where Dropwizard is used as an intermediary
> layer and integration tests using our test framework have shown it's a path
> to jar hell with Solr wanting one version and the Dropwizard based code
> wanting another... What I don't know is the extent to which OTel might be
> adopted by other similar frameworks (what does spring boot usually work
> with?) The issue of us having several hundred dependencies and folks using
> our test framework is always going to have some clash but maybe this will
> help?
>
> Side topic: I'm aware of at least two places that have come to the
> conclusion that integrated tests should spin up a separate JVM for solr,
> and part of me wonders if there's a way to push our test framework to do
> that natively so that folks using solr don't need to do a lot of
> engineering to create integration tests. This might also benefit our tests
> by having a separate log for the server and the client side of
> interactions. Currently, you can't just scroll through and look for the
> stack trace trivially because often you have one reported from the server
> and one reported from the test itself. We might even be able to set a "no
> stack trace in the logs" general standard for the server side of things
> this way and fail any tests that generate a stack trace to ensure that a
> healthy solr never logs stack traces. Such a thing might involve having a
> testing module (not loaded in production) that allows/simplifies
> configuration without security hurdles...
>
> The obvious question of course is speed.... But maybe a solidification of
> what's an integration test and what's a unit test helps there, and
> integration tests are intended for build infra, or final checks rather than
> developer testing during development.
>
> -Gus
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 11:45 PM David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > That's a nice start!  I'd like to work with you on making the SIP better.
> > Maybe a 1:1 (others invited too!) video might be most productive.  I'd
> love
> > to involve AB more here.  I think the SIP template that you clearly
> started
> > from isn't great; I'm tempted to replace it with a list of considerations
> > and not a proposed format.  People should structure their SIP however the
> > topic best presents itself.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 2:34 PM Matthew Biscocho (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD A) <
> > mbisco...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Based on the discussion from yesterdays meetup, created SIP-23 for
> moving
> > > to Open Telemetry
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SOLR/SIP-23%3A+Switch+from+DropWizard+to+OpenTelemetry
> > >
> > > With Solr 10 around the corner, hoping this work can get done before
> > then.
> > >
> > > From: dev@solr.apache.org At: 04/14/25 01:04:13 UTC-4:00To:
> > > dev@solr.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: SIP proposal: Switch from DropWizard to OpenTelemetry
> > >
> > > I'm excited about the change!  Where I work, it would *significantly*
> > > simplify our metrics pipeline if Solr were to embrace OTel for metrics,
> > as
> > > we could then use company-provided OTel plugins.  The broad industry
> > > adoption of OTel points to this being the least friction.  With
> > DropWizard,
> > > it appears we hacked attributes onto it, in a sense.
> > >
> > > The primary criteria/requirement that comes to mind is to have
> > > strong/sophisticated ways to filter the right metrics to publish.  Solr
> > has
> > > that today.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 5:00 PM Matthew Biscocho (BLOOMBERG/ 919 3RD
> A) <
> > > mbisco...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey everyone,
> > > >
> > > > Making this thread because I was interested in writing up a SIP for
> > > > SOLR-17458 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-17458 and
> > starting
> > > > a discussion around this. The proposed change involves migrating
> Solr's
> > > > metrics framework from DropWizard to OpenTelemetry (OTel). This will
> > move
> > > > Solr to an attribute based metric framework and will also help
> > > > future-proofing by keeping it from vendor lock-in, given
> > OpenTelemetry's
> > > > stance on being vendor-neutral and working with many different
> > pipelines.
> > > > Since Solr already packages an Open Telemetry SDK as a module for
> > > exporting
> > > > spans through OTLP, we can use that foundation to have it push
> metrics
> > as
> > > > well. There will be a significant change here which will probably
> break
> > > > many components and no longer be backwards compatible so this will
> > > probably
> > > > need to be a major release version change but we can potentially
> keep a
> > > few
> > > > things backwards compatible if needed. Just some things off the top
> of
> > my
> > > > head:
> > > >
> > > > * The Prometheus Exporter (Maybe should be deprecated?)
> > > > * GET /admin/metrics endpoint
> > > > * JVM metrics collected from OTel
> > > > * Metric reporters?
> > > >
> > > > Anyone have thoughts?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
> https://a.co/d/b2sZLD9 (my fantasy fiction book)
>

Reply via email to