Dedicated Log View for Request-Scoped Traces

[hanexthink]

I would like to propose a new log view in lnav designed specifically for displaying and analyzing request-scoped traces. These traces span multiple components or services within a distributed system, and a dedicated view would allow for more effective debugging and monitoring of end-to-end request flows.

[tstack]

Can you give some more details of what you're thinking here or examples from other products?

I recently added the TIMELINE view (formerly GANTT), is that the type of thing you were thinking of?

[hanexthink]

Hi @tstack

Thank you for the quick response and for adding the TIMELINE (formerly GANTT) view to Lnav!

I appreciate the continuous improvements to Lnav. I’d like to provide more details about my proposal for a trace-specific view tailored for displaying and analyzing request-scoped traces, especially those from distributed tracing systems like Zipkin.

Differences Between TIMELINE View and Proposed Trace View

1. Structured Span Relationships

   • TIMELINE View: Displays log events on a linear timeline without supporting parent-child span relationships.
   • Proposed Trace View: Focuses on the hierarchical structure of spans within a trace, showcasing parent and child relationships to represent the flow of requests across multiple services.

2. Dependency Visualization

   • TIMELINE View: Offers a temporal overview but lacks explicit depiction of dependencies between spans or services.
   • Proposed Trace View: Visualizes dependencies between spans, making it easier to identify interactions and pinpoint bottlenecks or failures.

3. Interactive Exploration

   • TIMELINE View: Provides a static timeline without interactive capabilities specific to trace analysis.
   • Proposed Trace View: Enables interaction with individual spans—expanding details, viewing metadata, filtering by service or span type, and isolating specific traces for deeper analysis.

Examples from Other Tools

• Jaeger

  • Trace View: Hierarchical display of spans with parent-child relationships and drill-down capabilities.
  • Dependency Diagram: Graphical representation of service dependencies based on trace data.

• Zipkin UI

  • Trace Timeline: Visualizes spans along a timeline with color-coded services.
  • Search and Filter: Robust filtering based on service name, operation, and latency.

• Grafana Tempo

  • Trace Explorer: Combines timeline views with span details and service dependency graphs for comprehensive trace exploration.

Specific Use Cases Highlighting the Need

1. End-to-End Request Debugging

   • Quickly pinpoint where a request failed or experienced high latency by visualizing the entire trace with span relationships.

2. Service Dependency Analysis

   • Reveal hidden dependencies or inefficient communication patterns between services that aren’t evident from standard log timelines.

3. Performance Bottleneck Identification

   • Identify which components contribute most to overall request latency by visualizing span durations and sequences.

Suggested Features for the Trace-Specific View

• Hierarchical Span Representation

  • Display parent and child spans in a collapsible tree structure.

• Interactive Span Details

  • Clickable spans that reveal detailed metadata, including tags, logs, and error information.

• Service Dependency Graph

  • Visualize interactions between different services within a trace.

• Filtering and Search

  • Filter traces based on services, operations, latency thresholds, and error statuses.

• Integration with TIMELINE View

  • Seamless navigation between the TIMELINE view and the new Trace view for comprehensive log and trace analysis.

Conclusion

Introducing a trace-specific view would significantly enhance Lnav’s capabilities in handling distributed tracing data, providing a more structured and interactive approach to analyzing request flows across multiple services. This addition would be highly beneficial for users relying on Zipkin and similar tracing systems for monitoring and debugging complex distributed architectures.

I’m happy to provide further examples, use cases, or assist in any way to help implement this feature. Thank you for considering this enhancement, and I look forward to your thoughts!