[Feature]: A Dev Feature for Naming Convention used in Windows Performance Counters

[anujnegi270]

Related Problems?

Our team is an early adopter of OpenTelemetry Rust for ingesting metrics, but we face challenges when dealing with Windows Performance Counters (PerfC) due to differences in naming conventions between OpenTelemetry and PerfC. Specifically, performance counters like \Processor Information(_Total)\% Processor Time (just an example) cannot be directly sent using OpenTelemetry because its naming structure doesn't align with OpenTelemetry’s expected format.

What component are you working with?

opentelemetry-user-events-metrics, N/A

Describe the solution you'd like:

If there's a way to bypass the name check or instead add a Performance Counter support in opentelemetry as a feature, this can be done!

Considered Alternatives

No response

Additional Context

No response

[lalitb]

If there's a way to bypass the name check or instead add a Performance Counter support in opentelemetry as a feature, this can be done!

I think you need to normalize the PerfC names to fit the expected format. The instrument name format is coming from the specs, and can't be bypassed in the SDK.

[cijothomas]

Moving to otel-rust repo, as naming validation is part of Otel API/SDK, not exporter.

[anujnegi270]

[like] Anuj Negi reacted to your message:

…

________________________________ From: Cijo Thomas ***@***.***> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2025 8:54:34 PM To: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust ***@***.***> Cc: Anuj Negi ***@***.***>; Author ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust] [Feature]: A Dev Feature for Naming Convention used in Windows Performance Counters (Issue #2527) Moving to otel-rust repo, as naming validation is part of Otel API/SDK, not exporter. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#2527 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BBQSETEUJVLMWDAARPDYIK32L2XYVAVCNFSM6AAAAABVTM7T6WVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDMMBVG4YTONZRHE>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[cijothomas]

Sharing one issue in the spec which is also asking to relax naming requirement: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#4371

While we wait spec movement, @lalitb is it okay to offer a "experimental_metrics_disable_name_validation" feature flag to bypass the validation to unblock users? I don't see any other way to report Windows Performance Counters which uses names disallowed by Otel....

[lalitb]

@Cijo i think it make sense to have it under experimental flag.

[cijothomas]

Okay.

@anujnegi270 Feel free to send a PR to bypass the validation, under a feature flag "experimental_metrics_disable_name_validation".

[anujnegi270]

[like] Anuj Negi reacted to your message:

…

________________________________ From: Cijo Thomas ***@***.***> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2025 12:54:20 AM To: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust ***@***.***> Cc: Anuj Negi ***@***.***>; Assign ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust] [Feature]: A Dev Feature for Naming Convention used in Windows Performance Counters (Issue #2527) Assigned #2527<#2527> to @anujnegi270<https://github.com/anujnegi270>. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#2527 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BBQSETBPC46KYISJEB7XZ7L2L3T3ZAVCNFSM6AAAAABVTM7T6WVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV45UABCJFZXG5LFIV3GK3TUJZXXI2LGNFRWC5DJN5XDWMJWGAZDCOJTGY4DINQ>. You are receiving this because you were assigned.Message ID: ***@***.***>