[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-349?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15627002#comment-15627002
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on CURATOR-349:
----------------------------------------

Github user Randgalt commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/curator/pull/172#discussion_r86045533
  
    --- Diff: 
curator-client/src/main/java/org/apache/curator/ConnectionState.java ---
    @@ -213,16 +213,14 @@ private synchronized void checkTimeouts() throws 
Exception
          * Return the current session id
          */
         public long getSessionId() {
    -        long sessionId = -1;
    -        if (isConnected()) {
    -            try {
    -                ZooKeeper zk = zooKeeper.getZooKeeper();
    -                if (zk != null) {
    -                    sessionId = zk.getSessionId();
    -                }
    -            } catch (Exception e) {
    -                // Ignore the exception
    +        long sessionId = 0;
    --- End diff --
    
    Why did we lose the `isConnected()` check?


> Expose extra metrics in TracerDriver
> ------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CURATOR-349
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-349
>             Project: Apache Curator
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Framework
>            Reporter: Fangmin Lv
>            Assignee: Jordan Zimmerman
>             Fix For: 3.2.1, 2.11.1
>
>
> Currently, the TracerDriver exposed the latency of ZK operations, in 
> multi-tenant environment, extra metrics are required to help tracing and 
> monitoring:
> * the bytes being sent and received, so we can monitor the client usage 
> scenarios.
> * which ensemble participant the client is talking to, used to find out the 
> problematic Zk server when the issue happened.
> * the z-node path, to easily find out which z-node caused the problem, like 
> high load, etc.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to