Conversation
tt-le
requested review from
AarushiShah-db,
lilly-luo and
rohita5l
as code owners
September 18, 2026 14:17
tt-le
force-pushed
the
tien/codex-otel-tracing-integration
branch
from
September 18, 2026 14:20
e47cf08 to
7f8a34b
Compare
An error occurred while trying to automatically change base from
tien/codex-otel-gateway-proxy
to
tien/gateway-proxy-parameterize
September 18, 2026 14:53
Point the tracing journey at the CI trace table main.aigw_tracing.unity_gateway_otel_spans and assert the marker span also carries Codex's `model` attribute, so the trace is attributable to the model that actually ran. Co-authored-by: Isaac <no-reply@databricks.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What & why
Stacked on #718.
Add an installed-product customer journey for the Codex tracing path introduced in #718:
main.aigw_tracing.unity_gateway_otel_spans, and require a span with both the UUID and the model that ran.The workspace deliberately has no published CodingAgentConfig, so this journey uses the integration suite's existing managed-fixture seam for only that configuration input. Codex, inference, OTLP export, the SQL warehouse, and table verification remain real.
Codex intentionally excludes prompt text from trace-safe spans. The UUID is therefore supplied both in the prompt and through Codex's supported
otel.span_attributesconfiguration, then queried asug_integration_marker. This proves the installed Codex → loopback OTLP proxy → gateway → tracing-table path without weakening prompt redaction.The journey runs in the existing Full Codex lane and reuses its eng-ml inference workspace and bearer. Codex sends credential-free OTLP requests to the loopback proxy; the proxy injects the current Databricks token only on the upstream trace request. Inference traffic does not use the proxy.
Testing
DATABRICKS_BEARERlacksUSE SCHEMAonmain.aigw_tracing. That identity needsUSE CATALOGonmain,USE SCHEMAonmain.aigw_tracing, andSELECTonmain.aigw_tracing.unity_gateway_otel_spans; the test intentionally remains strict rather than skipping table verification.This pull request and its description were written by Isaac.