[jaeger-v2] Add support for artificial jaeger storage receiver

[james-ryans]

Which problem is this PR solving?

• Part of [tracking] Jaeger v2 based on OpenTelemetry collector #4843
• Separate Jaeger storage receiver PR from and will be used by jaeger-v2 Kafka PR [jaeger-v2] Add kafka exporter and receiver configuration #4971

Description of the changes

• Implement Jaeger storage receiver to be used by Jaeger-v2 Kafka integration test.

How was this change tested?

• Added some unit tests.

Checklist

• I have read https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING_GUIDELINES.md
• I have signed all commits
• I have added unit tests for the new functionality
• I have run lint and test steps successfully
  • for jaeger: make lint test
  • for jaeger-ui: yarn lint and yarn test

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 97.56098% with 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 95.09%. Comparing base (286b94a) to head (efcf080).

Files	Patch %	Lines
.../integration/receivers/storagereceiver/receiver.go	96.87%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5242      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.09%   95.09%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         336      339       +3     
  Lines       16421    16502      +81     
==========================================
+ Hits        15615    15692      +77     
- Misses        618      621       +3     
- Partials      188      189       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
cassandra-3.x	26.56% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-4.x	26.56% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-5.x	21.80% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-6.x	21.78% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
elasticsearch-7.x	21.88% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-8.x	21.95% <ø> (ø)
grpc-badger	19.26% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️
kafka	14.56% <ø> (ø)
opensearch-1.x	21.88% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️
opensearch-2.x	21.86% <ø> (ø)
unittests	92.71% <97.56%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[james-ryans]

Hi @yurishkuro, I've implemented the Jaeger storage receiver as you stated it's better to separate this PR. There are still things to add here:

1. Improve coverage but I will need to abstract the jaeger storage extension with interface similar to Add tests for internal/extension/jaegerquery #5123
2. Add a configurable pull interval delay

[james-ryans]

Why is this an error for the consumer?

I actually follow kafkareceiver from otelcol-contrib since they're both a "pull" strategy to retrieve traces. https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector-contrib/blob/3652b444802fad4819b50fbda41e0957000d8279/receiver/kafkareceiver/kafka_receiver.go#L171-L185

[yurishkuro]

I think it's wrong to treat orderly shutdown as error and log all kinds of error messages. You can check Done instead

        select {
        case <-ctx.Done():
            return
        default:
            time.Sleep(time.Second)
        }

[james-ryans]

how do we exit this loop? Should it be checking ctx.Done for that?

When the r.cancelConsumeLoop() is called from Shutdown, we can capture that with ctx.Err(). Is it better to check with ctx.Done? I followed kafkareceiver implementation from otelcol-contrib actually https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector-contrib/blob/3652b444802fad4819b50fbda41e0957000d8279/receiver/kafkareceiver/kafka_receiver.go#L171-L185

[yurishkuro]

I think it's wrong to treat orderly shutdown as error and log all kinds of error messages. You can check Done instead

        select {
        case <-ctx.Done():
            return
        default:
            time.Sleep(time.Second)
        }