[HN Gopher] LLM Observability in the Wild - Why OpenTelemetry Sh...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       LLM Observability in the Wild - Why OpenTelemetry Should Be the
       Standard
        
       Author : pranay01
       Score  : 46 points
       Date   : 2025-09-27 18:56 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (signoz.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (signoz.io)
        
       | CuriouslyC wrote:
       | A full observability stack is just a docker compose away: Otel +
       | Phoenix + Clickhouse and off to the races. No excuse not to do
       | it.
        
         | perfmode wrote:
         | Phoenix as in Elixir?
        
           | mindcrime wrote:
           | I imagine they meant:
           | 
           | https://github.com/Arize-ai/phoenix
        
         | pranay01 wrote:
         | one of the cases we have observed is that Phoenix doesn't
         | completely stick to OTel conventions.
         | 
         | More specifically, one issue I observed is how it handles span
         | kinds. If you send via OTel, the span Kinds are classified as
         | unknown
         | 
         | e.g. The Phoneix screenshot here - https://signoz.io/blog/llm-
         | observability-opentelemetry/#the-...
        
           | CuriouslyC wrote:
           | If it doesn't work for your use case that's cool, but in
           | terms of interface for doing this kind of work it is the
           | best. Tradeoffs.
        
             | 7thpower wrote:
             | I've found phoenix to be a clunky experience and have been
             | far happier with tools like langfuse.
             | 
             | I don't know how you can confidently say one is "the best".
        
               | a_khan wrote:
               | Curious what you prefer from langfuse over Phoenix!
        
           | ijk wrote:
           | Spans labeled as 'unknown' when I definitely labeled them in
           | the code is probably the most annoying part of Phoenix right
           | now.
        
         | dcreater wrote:
         | Is phoenix really the no-brainer go to? There are so many
         | choices - langfuse, w&b etc.
        
       | ram_rar wrote:
       | The article makes a fair case for sticking with OTel, but it also
       | feels a bit like forcing a general purpose tool into a domain
       | where richer semantics might genuinely help. "Just add
       | attributes" sounds neat until you're debugging a multi-agent
       | system with dynamic tool calls. Maybe hybrid or bridging
       | standards are inevitable?
       | 
       | Curious if others here have actually tried scaling LLM
       | observability in production like where does it hold up, and where
       | does it collapse? Do you also feel the "open standards" narrative
       | sometimes carries a bit of vendor bias along with it?
        
         | mrlongroots wrote:
         | I think standard relational databases/schemas are underrated
         | for when you need richness.
         | 
         | OTel or anything in that domain is fine when you have a
         | distributed callgraph, which inference with tool calls does. I
         | think the fallback layer if that doesn't work is just say
         | Clickhouse.
        
       | bfung wrote:
       | TL;DR - follow https://opentelemetry.io/docs/specs/semconv/gen-
       | ai/
        
       | olliem36 wrote:
       | We've built a multi-agent system, designed to run complex tasks
       | and workflows with just a single prompt. Prompts are written by
       | non-technical people, can be 10+ pages long...
       | 
       | We've invested heavily in observability having quickly found that
       | observability + evals are the cornerstone to a successful agent.
       | 
       | For example, a few things measure:
       | 
       | 1. Task complexity (assessed by another LLM) 2. Success metrics
       | given the task(s) (Agin by other LLMS) 3. Speed of agent runs &
       | tools 4. Errors of tools, inc time outs. 5. How much
       | summarizaiton and chunking occurs between agents and tool results
       | 6. tokens used, cost 7. reasoning, model selected by our dynamic
       | routing..
       | 
       | Thank god its been relatively cheap to build this in house.. our
       | metrics dashboard is essentially a vibe coded react admin site..
       | but proves absolutely invaluable!
       | 
       | All of this happed after a heavy investment in agent
       | orchestration, context management... it's been quite a ride!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-09-27 23:00 UTC)