Skip to content

Conversation

carsonip
Copy link
Member

@carsonip carsonip commented Jul 30, 2025

Add a FAQ section for APM Server Tail based sampling

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jul 30, 2025

🔍 Preview links for changed docs

@carsonip carsonip marked this pull request as ready for review August 1, 2025 12:56
@carsonip carsonip requested a review from a team as a code owner August 1, 2025 12:56
@carsonip carsonip changed the title WIP: APM TBS FAQ APM Server TBS FAQ Aug 1, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@florent-leborgne florent-leborgne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM with very small styling comments

Co-authored-by: florent-leborgne <[email protected]>
@carsonip carsonip requested a review from simitt August 1, 2025 14:42

:::{dropdown} Why doesn't the sampling rate shown in Storage Explorer match the configured tail sampling rate?

In APM Server, the tail sampling policy applied to a distributed trace is determined by evaluating the configured policies in order against the root transaction (the transaction without a parent) and using the first policy that matches. In contrast, the APM UI Storage Explorer calculates the effective average sampling rate for each service using a different method. It considers both head-based and tail-based sampling, but does not account for root transactions. As a result, the sampling rate displayed in Storage Explorer may differ from the configured tail sampling rate, which can give the false impression that tail-based sampling is not functioning correctly.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I find this a bit hard to follow. Linking to https://www.elastic.co/docs/solutions/observability/apm/transaction-sampling#distributed-tracing-examples and then building up from there might go a long way.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added link to examples

@carsonip carsonip requested a review from simitt August 4, 2025 11:08
@carsonip carsonip enabled auto-merge (squash) August 4, 2025 13:04
@carsonip carsonip merged commit 8e50e5d into elastic:main Aug 4, 2025
7 of 8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants