open-telemetry / open-telemetry/opentelemetry-cpp
Rework batch processor to elaborate in code comments / avoid while(...) loops
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- C++
- Stars
- 1.4k
- Forks
- 632
- Avg merge
- 1d 13h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 75
Description
There's a code in Batch Log processor that contains the following constructs:
while (is_force_flush_.load() == true)
{
cv_.notify_one();
}
These constructs look suspicious, as "what if" the other thread does not refresh the is_force_flush value - does it mean that we are effectively busy-waiting, burning CPU cycles?
Should this be supplemented with some timed idle-wait or with std:🧵:yield , or reworked using conditional variables?
Discussed with @open-telemetry/cpp-approvers during SIG call that the code as it is coded - looks funky, but should be fine .. Let's see if it can be reworked long-term to look cleaner.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by locating the Batch Log processor and the while loop checking is_force_flush_.load(), then review the surrounding condition-variable and notification logic. Compare the current behavior with the issue's proposed timed wait, yield, or conditional-variable approaches; done means a cleaner design that avoids unnecessary busy-waiting without changing force-flush behavior.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- observability-sre
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100