Le 22/12/2020 à 14:49, Willy Tarreau a écrit :
By the way I just had a look at the dump function in prometheus, I
don't understand why it's reimplenting all the info filling by itself.
We could seriously simplify things by calling stats_fill_info() once,
then iterating over all the metrics,
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 10:03:00AM +0100, Christopher Faulet wrote:
> Le 04/01/2021 à 08:58, William Dauchy a écrit :
> > On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:10 PM William Dauchy wrote:
> > > > But in addition, it only uses the field for prometheus and not
> > > > for the rest of the stats, making a
Le 04/01/2021 à 08:58, William Dauchy a écrit :
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:10 PM William Dauchy wrote:
But in addition, it only uses the field for prometheus and not
for the rest of the stats, making a special case in the stats for
prometheus, which I don't like much.
So given that the version
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 09:40:58AM +0100, William Dauchy wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:34 AM Julien Pivotto wrote:
> > I am questioning if the release date is really a useful label however.
>
> It was a simple example to show the present and future needs to gather
> such fields in labels.
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:34 AM Julien Pivotto wrote:
> I am questioning if the release date is really a useful label however.
It was a simple example to show the present and future needs to gather
such fields in labels. The real debate here is not about which field
we put, but how we construct
On 04 Jan 09:25, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 08:58:05AM +0100, William Dauchy wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:10 PM William Dauchy wrote:
> > > > But in addition, it only uses the field for prometheus and not
> > > > for the rest of the stats, making a special case in the
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 08:58:05AM +0100, William Dauchy wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:10 PM William Dauchy wrote:
> > > But in addition, it only uses the field for prometheus and not
> > > for the rest of the stats, making a special case in the stats for
> > > prometheus, which I don't like
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:10 PM William Dauchy wrote:
> > But in addition, it only uses the field for prometheus and not
> > for the rest of the stats, making a special case in the stats for
> > prometheus, which I don't like much.
> > So given that the version and release dates were already
Hi Willy,
Thank you for the review.
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 2:50 PM Willy Tarreau wrote:
> We must not renumber these entries because it directly impacts their
> output order in the "show info" output, that some tools rely on since
> these entries have remained stable from day one (hence the
Hi William,
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:32:41AM +0100, William Dauchy wrote:
> This patch follows prometheus best pratices to export specific software
> informations. While being there, I added compiler and release date.
This is great, however there are two problems here:
> diff --git
commit c55a626217a7e676e1cc ("MINOR: contrib/prometheus-exporter: Add
missing global and per-server metrics") is renaming two metrics between
v2.2 and v2.3:
server_idle_connections_current
server_idle_connections_limit
It is breaking some tools which are making use of those metrics while
11 matches
Mail list logo
