Mining data audit from my point of view. We have extra data for nodes. We can include those inputs if needed
El mar, 23 abr 2024, 13:11, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti < [email protected]> escribió: > And now a pretty questionable metric that was requested and that I feel it > belongs to the audit domain, but let's discuss it ;) > There is a user that wants to know the number of times a certain parameter > has been passed with a certain value to a workflow type (a process id). > Since we do not really have the concept of parameter as is (it is just a > field in a POJO for BPMN and a propert in a JSON for SWF), I was thinking > on providing a custom module to cope with that request to not change the > default ones, but maybe we can think of a way to adding that metric in a > general way. > One idea might be to add a counter with three tags (process-id, parameter > name and parameter value). The issue here is what we understood as a > parameter. > Any idea is welcome (even to rule out the possibility and defer to custom > metrics extensions) > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 12:59 PM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Yes, I was thinking something like that. > > In the parser, add a metadata key ("Metric"?) to the node you want to > > record duration for. > > In the monitoring addon, check for that metadata key and if there, add > the > > duration of that node to the metric. > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 12:54 PM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> I would say is not bad idea but I would restrict per node. Usually you > >> dont > >> want to store information about a script or a transformation.... Maybe a > >> rest call or a service to keep taps on them. I would something like. > >> > >> Metadata on the node for signaling you want to meassure time > >> Metrics per process id - node maybe min, max, average ? > >> > >> Wdyt ? > >> > >> > >> El mar, 23 abr 2024, 11:17, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti < > >> [email protected]> escribió: > >> > >> > Hi Enrique, I was wondering if we should go further (using a different > >> > issue) and add an additional DistributionSummary " > >> > kogito_node_instance_duration_seconds" to track node execution > duration, > >> > similar to already existing > "kogito_process_instance_duration_seconds" > >> and > >> > "kogito_work_item_duration_seconds", wdyt? > >> > I think such a summary should only be enabled explicitly through > >> > configuration, because the number of records is potentially too high. > >> > > >> > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 4:47 PM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez < > >> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > The proposal is sensible as it will fit more what the user has in > the > >> > > data index/audit... so we won't have problems regarding data that > does > >> > > not fit among sources. > >> > > +1 to me. > >> > > > >> > > One of the things that we should be aware of is related to > >> > > clustering... one process can start in one node.... and can be > >> > > completed in other. This should be kept in mind. > >> > > > >> > > El lun, 22 abr 2024 a las 14:56, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti > >> > > (<[email protected]>) escribió: > >> > > > > >> > > > While implementing the proposal, I faced an issue that forced me > to > >> > amend > >> > > > it https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1101 to > >> keep > >> > it > >> > > > aligned with the existing monitoring collection approach. > >> > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 9:53 AM Fabrizio Antonangeli < > >> > > > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > +1 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 8:46 PM ricardo zanini fernandes < > >> > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > +1 > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 2:56 PM Pere Fernandez < > >> > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > +1 > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > El dv., 19 d’abr. 2024, 18:06, Francisco Javier Tirado > Sarti < > >> > > > > > > [email protected]> va escriure: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi all, > >> > > > > > > > Let me know if there is any problem with the proposal in > >> this > >> > > issue > >> > > > > > > > < > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1101 > >> > > >> > > > > > > description. > >> > > > > > > > Thanks > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
