Skip to content

Conversation

kruskall
Copy link
Member

Add a protobuf definition for APMBatch and generate models

@kruskall kruskall requested a review from a team as a code owner March 28, 2024 21:40
@elastic-apm-tech elastic-apm-tech added the safe-to-test Changes are safe to run in the CI label Mar 28, 2024
@inge4pres
Copy link

I noticed we already have a "Batch" type defined here
https://github.com/elastic/apm-data/blame/f171078e95faa52f34fc6f91c07c54f3de2cd40c/model/modelpb/batch.go#L46

Is the generated code different with the proposed change?

@kruskall
Copy link
Member Author

kruskall commented May 29, 2024

I noticed we already have a "Batch" type defined here
https://github.com/elastic/apm-data/blame/f171078e95faa52f34fc6f91c07c54f3de2cd40c/model/modelpb/batch.go#L46

Is the generated code different with the proposed change?

Yes. The modelpb.APMBatch in this PR is a protobuf message which can be marshaled/unmarshaled.

the modelpb.Batch type you linked is an alias for a slice of APMEvents and it's what is being passed down to the batch processors.

@inge4pres
Copy link

the modelpb.Batch type you linked is an alias for a slice of APMEvents and it's what is being passed down to the batch processors.

Thanks, I'll read further on your previous work to understand how we're going from one to another (the list of APMEvent to the Batch), because we don't want to have a breaking API change correct?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

safe-to-test Changes are safe to run in the CI

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants