I already found a question that show exactly what I need for the tag FW1 representation (https://answers.dynatrace.com/questions/108785/x-dynatrace-header-to-identify-a-purepath.html , Michael F. answer), but I still can't find this specification for FW4 tag generated by PurePaths.
Solved! Go to Solution.
Hi Abud -
FW1, FW2, FW3, FW4 are essentially iterations of the PurePath format. These tags allow us to add increasingly granular additional context to the PurePaths. This allows us to expand. FW4 is the latest iteration and allows us to generically add further content to the string to keep making the PurePath better and more descriptive to you. Why do you need further context into the contents of the PurePath tag construction? If you have a true need this may need to be a more personal chat. @Michael K. may be able to add more context should you need it.\
Those formats are subject to change to since they're internal to Dynatrace. If you're interested in something to build off of I'd check out trying W3C Trace Context support https://www.dynatrace.com/news/blog/distributed-tracing-with-w3c-trace-context-for-improved-end-to-e... which is an open standard.
I want to write the dynatrace (request,trace) id into the Splunk Log as additional context information. I want to use this id to lookup the purepath/service in Dynatrace.
Which header/cookie should be used for that usecase?
We use Opentrace to add traceId/spanId to the slf4j logging context automatically and log this information with each statement. It would be nice to use some Dynatrace ids, but it is not clear which cookie/header has the same functionality.
How does Dynatrace integrate with Opentracing? If enabled will it still store the traceId and spanId even if the Dynatrace is running on that system?