At first I assumed this was similar to trace IDs, but it’s solving a different problem.
This is more like giving stable IDs to individual log statements (e.g. “upload started”, “upload retrying”, “upload failed”, “upload completed”), so you can see higher-level trends.
It makes it easy to see whether failures dropped after releasing a fix, without relying on fragile text searches.
Useful for team leads or engineering managers who want a high-level view of how system behavior changes over time.
Exactly. The combination of trace IDs and statement IDs is also a very interesting topic as it has the potential to provide an abstracted view of the runtime behaviours of a system, making is easier to spot when those changes (e.g. as a result of a new version release).
Would love feedback or ideas on where to take it next — I’m planning to add image tracking and store that usage data in Parquet or Iceberg on R2 as well.
This is more like giving stable IDs to individual log statements (e.g. “upload started”, “upload retrying”, “upload failed”, “upload completed”), so you can see higher-level trends.
It makes it easy to see whether failures dropped after releasing a fix, without relying on fragile text searches.
Useful for team leads or engineering managers who want a high-level view of how system behavior changes over time.