[v2][query] Apply "Max Clock Skew Adjust" setting

[dnaka91]

Apply the max_clock_skew_adjust setting to the query service during initialization.

The maximum clock skew adjustment setting for the query component is properly read during initialization, but not applied in the v2 server in the end. This causes it to always default to 1 second, regardless of the configuration value.

Which problem is this PR solving?

• Resolves [Bug]: Max clock skew setting not applied in v2 #6565

Description of the changes

• Initialize and set the Adjuster on both the v1 and v2 query options.
• The config defaults to 0 so applying this unconditionally would now disable the clock skew adjustment instead of defaulting to 1s? However, the same seems to be done in the older services from v1.
  • Having a default of 1s instead of 0 (which disables adjustments completely) might have been an accident?

How was this change tested?

• Not testing so far.

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: npm run lint and npm run test

[dnaka91]

@yurishkuro I adjusted the PR to instead pass down the value through the service options and make the adjuster internal. I hope I understood your comment correctly by that change idea.

There didn't seem to be any reason to keep the adjuster public and imho this way it's clearer as there is only one place that sets the adjuster field.

[yurishkuro]

We have a bit of a mess right now:

• cmd/query/app/flags.go uses CLI flag to set qOpts.MaxClockSkewAdjust and then uses that to initialize Adjuster in v1/v2 QueryServiceOptions
• at the same time, v1/v2 QueryService constructors check if Adjuster is null and initialize it with defaultMaxClockSkewAdjust
• meanwhile cmd/jaeger/internal/extension/jaegerquery/server.go creates v1/v2 QueryServiceOptions without Adjuster

As a result, in v1 the user-settings are respected, but in v2 we always end up with defaultMaxClockSkewAdjust, even though the config has a setting.

I would like to minimize duplication. My suggestion is:

• remove Adjuster from the options altogether,
• make it a private field in the QS,
• initialize it in the constructor,
• extend Options structs to contain MaxClockSkewAdjust field
• initialize this field in cmd/query/app/flags.go and cmd/jaeger/internal/extension/jaegerquery/server.go

cc @mahadzaryab1

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 95.93%. Comparing base (10bacb7) to head (e208918).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #6566      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.94%   95.93%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         365      365              
  Lines       20616    20618       +2     
==========================================
- Hits        19781    19780       -1     
- Misses        636      638       +2     
- Partials      199      200       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
badger_v1	9.92% <ø> (ø)
badger_v2	1.84% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-4.x-v1-manual	14.93% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-4.x-v2-auto	1.83% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-4.x-v2-manual	1.83% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-5.x-v1-manual	14.93% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-5.x-v2-auto	1.83% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-5.x-v2-manual	1.83% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-6.x-v1	19.30% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-7.x-v1	19.38% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-8.x-v1	19.56% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-8.x-v2	1.84% <ø> (ø)
grpc_v1	10.90% <ø> (ø)
grpc_v2	7.89% <ø> (ø)
kafka-3.x-v1	10.21% <ø> (ø)
kafka-3.x-v2	1.84% <ø> (ø)
memory_v2	1.84% <ø> (ø)
opensearch-1.x-v1	19.44% <ø> (ø)
opensearch-2.x-v1	19.44% <ø> (ø)
opensearch-2.x-v2	1.84% <ø> (ø)
tailsampling-processor	0.48% <ø> (ø)
unittests	94.82% <100.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

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.

[yurishkuro]

SIGSEGV in unit tests, please make sure make test is successful.

[dnaka91]

Sorry for that, didn't test the latest few changes anymore before heading to bed. Tests should be passing again now 🙇‍♂️

[dnaka91]

Ah I see some merge conflicts have come up, let me fix those (hopefully) real quick.

[yurishkuro]

Thanks!