Added OTEL MeterProvider in Telemetery Settings

[shinigami-777]

Which problem is this PR solving?

• [jaeger-v2] Add Meter Provider To Telemetry Settings #6127

Description of the changes

• This PR introduces LeveledMeterProvider in the Telemetery Settings struct . This has been propagated to other parts in the codebase.

How was this change tested?

• I had successfully run make fmt and make lint test for testing.

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

[mahadzaryab1]

@shinigami-777 The purpose of this ticket isn't necessarily to change how the settings are being initialized but rather to pass down the meter provider from OTEL. You can break down this task as follows:

• Add the LeveledMeterProvider to telemetry.Setting
• Pass in the LeveledMeterProvider wherever it is available. For example, in the jaeger-v2 query server, you can pass it in here by doing s.telset.LeveledMeterProvider. If it is not available, which will be the case for anything that is specific to v1, you can pass in the noop meter provider

[shinigami-777]

@mahadzaryab1 Thanks for the clarity. I have made the necessary changes.

[mahadzaryab1]

Now that we've got this field available to us - we also want to be able to use it. For example, in the query server we currently hardcode the meter provider but now we can pass it from telset.

[shinigami-777]

Passed it in the query server.

[shinigami-777]

@mahadzaryab1 I have propagated the setting everywhere in the codebase.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.49%. Comparing base (3f752c2) to head (9bc1a11).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #6144      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.47%   96.49%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         354      354              
  Lines       20126    20127       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        19417    19421       +4     
+ Misses        524      522       -2     
+ Partials      185      184       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
badger_v1	8.31% <ø> (ø)
badger_v2	1.67% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-4.x-v1	14.39% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-4.x-v2	1.61% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-5.x-v1	14.39% <ø> (ø)
cassandra-5.x-v2	1.61% <ø> (ø)
elasticsearch-6.x-v1	18.60% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
elasticsearch-7.x-v1	18.68% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
elasticsearch-8.x-v1	18.84% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
elasticsearch-8.x-v2	1.67% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️
grpc_v1	9.47% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
grpc_v2	7.00% <ø> (ø)
kafka-v1	8.88% <ø> (ø)
kafka-v2	1.67% <ø> (ø)
memory_v2	1.67% <ø> (ø)
opensearch-1.x-v1	18.72% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
opensearch-2.x-v1	18.73% <ø> (ø)
opensearch-2.x-v2	1.66% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
tailsampling-processor	0.46% <ø> (ø)
unittests	95.40% <100.00%> (+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.