[tracing] add MassTransit integration

[chojomok]

Summary of changes

Reason for change

Implementation details

Test coverage

Other details

[chojomok]

this is terrible - I should have checked first that we never actually checked the snapshot.

I'll fix this in a bit

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-01-15 23:11:11

Comparing candidate commit c7eb719 in PR branch mohammad/mass_transit_intg with baseline commit 1863e47 in branch master.

Some scenarios are present only in baseline or only in candidate runs. If you didn't create or remove some scenarios in your branch, this maybe a sign of crashed benchmarks 💥💥💥
Check Gitlab CI job log to find if any benchmark has crashed.

Scenarios present only in baseline:

• Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore net472
• Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore netcoreapp3.1
• Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore net6.0

Found 11 performance improvements and 7 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 149 metrics, 19 unstable metrics.

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartStopWithChild net472

• 🟥 throughput [-45760.094op/s; -44560.272op/s] or [-51.777%; -50.419%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartStopWithChild net6.0

• 🟥 throughput [-34715.437op/s; -32534.425op/s] or [-27.999%; -26.240%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartStopWithChild netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 throughput [-27858.924op/s; -25814.060op/s] or [-28.590%; -26.492%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net6.0

• 🟩 execution_time [-78.525ms; -78.472ms] or [-38.592%; -38.566%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleMoreComplexBody net6.0

• 🟩 execution_time [-17.162ms; -12.181ms] or [-7.984%; -5.667%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleSimpleBody netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 execution_time [-19.263ms; -14.261ms] or [-8.806%; -6.519%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorSimpleBody netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 throughput [+148393.926op/s; +218212.001op/s] or [+6.315%; +9.286%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeLegacyArgs net6.0

• 🟥 execution_time [+18.999ms; +19.803ms] or [+10.645%; +11.095%]
• 🟥 throughput [-860.385op/s; -834.079op/s] or [-12.304%; -11.928%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeLegacyArgs netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 execution_time [-20.689ms; -19.825ms] or [-10.292%; -9.862%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 execution_time [-38.846ms; -33.939ms] or [-20.170%; -17.622%]
• 🟩 throughput [+85.674op/s; +123.598op/s] or [+6.442%; +9.293%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearch net6.0

• 🟥 throughput [-39076.554op/s; -32838.504op/s] or [-6.468%; -5.435%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearch netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 throughput [+24525.630op/s; +37018.516op/s] or [+5.560%; +8.393%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearchAsync netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 throughput [+29770.551op/s; +35503.542op/s] or [+7.141%; +8.516%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark.ExecuteAsync net472

• 🟩 throughput [+31458.063op/s; +33563.627op/s] or [+8.407%; +8.970%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan net6.0

• 🟥 execution_time [+10.421ms; +14.564ms] or [+5.291%; +7.395%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 execution_time [-19.717ms; -16.074ms] or [-9.320%; -7.598%]