FTDCS-33 added logs to failing graphiteSpike checks #170
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
apaleslimghost
approved these changes
Dec 15, 2021
JSRedondo
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 20, 2022
FTDCS-33 added logs to failing graphiteSpike checks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Next-health has this health check: https://github.com/Financial-Times/next-health/blob/main/server/config/health-checks/platform.js. It is very flappy. The flaps are ephemeral - such at that if you click on "healthcheck source" in Heimdall immediately after it goes red, you'll get a "all healthy" source logs. As we can't see what numbers are triggering the flaps, it is really difficult - bordering on impossible - to fix the source of the problem. We are hoping that this log will help us see what is wrong when the flaps happen and act accordingly.
Q: Why just graphiteSpike, and not all of the checks?
A: This has a potential to be noisy and expensive. I would love to add this to all of the checks, but I want to use this one as a trial to see if it actually does give the information we want, and if that information is as useful as we hoped.