Use isNoop() instead of Observation.NOOP #47072
Open
+4
−4
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jonatan-ivanov
added
the
status: waiting-for-triage
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
TL;DR: this is a polishing PR as long as micrometer-metrics/micrometer#6700 is not merged (
1.16.0). If that will happen, tests will break without this change.Details:
The Micrometer team is considering some improvements in the Observation API which involves changing the behavior of
Observation.NOOP: micrometer-metrics/micrometer#6700Observation.NOOPis not truly no-op right now, it does context propagation, we are trying to make it truly no-op in the PR above. The non-truly no-op version will still be used in certain scenarios (seeNoopButScopeHandlingObservation).observation.isNoop()should be used for checking if an Observation is no-op or not instead ofObservation.NOOP.