Add docs for resource out otel

[cb645j]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Added a new configuration option to the OpenTelemetry output plugin, allowing users to specify a Resource attribute key for message handling. The option is configurable in both YAML and Fluent Bit formats with a default value of none.

• Documentation

  • Updated OpenTelemetry output plugin documentation with examples of the new configuration option.

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

A new configuration option logs_resource_attributes_message_key is added to the OpenTelemetry output plugin documentation. This option allows users to specify a Resource attribute key for messages with a default value of none. The documentation is updated to reflect this addition in parameter tables and example configurations.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
OpenTelemetry Output Configuration pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md	Added new configuration option logs_resource_attributes_message_key (string, default: none) to the parameter table and updated example pipeline configurations for both Fluent Bit YAML and config formats.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~5 minutes

Poem

🐰 A new key hops into the fold,
logs_resource_attributes_message_key bold,
With none as default, crisp and clean,
The finest telemetry ever seen! 📡✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Title check	❓ Inconclusive	The title 'Add docs for resource out otel' is vague and uses non-descriptive abbreviations that don't clearly convey what documentation was added or what specific resource feature is being documented.	Consider a more descriptive title such as 'Add documentation for logs_resource_attributes_message_key configuration option in OpenTelemetry output' to clearly indicate which feature and configuration option is being documented.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 3

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md`:
- Line 41: Update the param table row for logs_resource_attributes_message_key
so its description clearly states that this key names a message-field whose
value will be promoted into the OpenTelemetry Resource attributes (distinct from
logs_resource_metadata_key which maps metadata fields); replace the vague text
with an explicit phrase like “Specify the message field key whose value will be
promoted into the Resource attributes.”
- Line 139: The fluent-bit.conf example includes a new option that is missing
from the fluent-bit.yaml example; update the YAML example in
pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md (the fluent-bit.yaml code block around the
current examples) to include the equivalent key/value entry so both examples
demonstrate the same feature set—locate the fluent-bit.conf block to see the
exact option name and value, then add the matching YAML mapping/key under the
fluent-bit.yaml section with the same semantic setting and a brief inline
comment mirroring the conf example.
- Around line 189-190: Remove the invalid Fluent Bit OpenTelemetry output option
`logs_resource_attributes_message_key` and instead demonstrate configuring
resource attributes via a processors pipeline using the `opentelemetry_envelope`
processor with `content_modifier`; specifically, delete the two lines containing
`logs_resource_attributes_message_key application_id` and
`logs_resource_attributes_message_key service_name` and replace (or document)
using an `opentelemetry_envelope` processor block with `content_modifier` rules
to add/rename resource attributes for logs as per the OpenTelemetry processor
usage.

---

ℹ️ Review info

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between dc38f3c and d51e2fd.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

Clarify the new key’s purpose in the parameter table.

At Line 41, the description currently matches logs_resource_metadata_key semantics and is too vague. Please make it explicit that this is a message-field key promoted into Resource attributes.

Suggested doc wording

-| `logs_resource_attributes_message_key`    | Specify a `Resource` key.                                                      | _none_                                                                      |
+| `logs_resource_attributes_message_key`    | Specify a message key whose value is added as a `Resource` attribute.          | _none_                                                                      |

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change

	| `logs_resource_attributes_message_key` | Specify a `Resource` key. | _none_ |
	| `logs_resource_attributes_message_key` | Specify a message key whose value is added as a `Resource` attribute. | _none_ |

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md` at line 41, Update the param table row for
logs_resource_attributes_message_key so its description clearly states that this
key names a message-field whose value will be promoted into the OpenTelemetry
Resource attributes (distinct from logs_resource_metadata_key which maps
metadata fields); replace the vague text with an explicit phrase like “Specify
the message field key whose value will be promoted into the Resource
attributes.”

[eschabell]

@cb645j add a bit more clarity for each one in the description please.

[coderabbitai]

Seems like the humans are having a chat. I'll hop back into my burrow for now. If you need me again, just tag @coderabbitai in a new comment, and I'll come hopping out!

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

Keep YAML and classic config examples aligned.

The new option is shown in the fluent-bit.conf example but not in fluent-bit.yaml near Line 139. Please add the YAML equivalent so both examples demonstrate the same feature set.

Suggested YAML addition

       logs_severity_text_message_key: loglevel
       logs_severity_number_message_key: lognum
+      logs_resource_attributes_message_key: application_id

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md` at line 139, The fluent-bit.conf example
includes a new option that is missing from the fluent-bit.yaml example; update
the YAML example in pipeline/outputs/opentelemetry.md (the fluent-bit.yaml code
block around the current examples) to include the equivalent key/value entry so
both examples demonstrate the same feature set—locate the fluent-bit.conf block
to see the exact option name and value, then add the matching YAML mapping/key
under the fluent-bit.yaml section with the same semantic setting and a brief
inline comment mirroring the conf example.

[eschabell]

@cb645j need to fix this one.

[coderabbitai]

Seems like the humans are having a chat. I'll hop back into my burrow for now. If you need me again, just tag @coderabbitai in a new comment, and I'll come hopping out!

[eschabell]

@cb645j a few ai review issues to be solved please, see above comment.

[eschabell]

@cb645j thanks for the updates, but it's now raised conflicts that I need you to resolve before I can review?