feature/add resources to vmcluster #556
Conversation
dosubot
bot
added
the
size:M
WalkthroughThis pull request involves version updates and configuration modifications across multiple monitoring-related files. The changes primarily focus on updating version numbers for the tenant and monitoring applications, adjusting resource configurations for various monitoring components, and fine-tuning metrics storage settings. The modifications span several packages, including tenant, monitoring, and system monitoring agents, with updates to Chart.yaml files, template configurations, and version mappings. Changes
Suggested Labels
Suggested Reviewers
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
packages/system/monitoring-agents/templates/vmagent.yaml (1)
21-24: Memory allocation looks good, but consider adding CPU limits.The memory configuration follows good practices with:
- Reasonable request (768Mi) to limit (1024Mi) ratio
- Sufficient headroom for spikes
However, consider adding CPU limits to prevent potential resource contention:
resources: limits: memory: 1024Mi + cpu: 1000m requests: cpu: 50m memory: 768Mipackages/apps/tenant/templates/monitoring.yaml (1)
31-36: Consider defining explicit resource limits.Empty resource blocks (
resources: {}) for vminsert, vmselect, and vmstorage could lead to unbounded resource usage. While default values are provided in vmcluster.yaml, consider defining explicit limits here for better resource control and documentation.Also applies to: 41-46
packages/extra/monitoring/templates/vm/vmcluster.yaml (1)
51-59: Increased vmstorage memory limit is appropriate.The memory limit increase to 2048Mi for vmstorage is justified given:
- Reduced deduplication interval (more frequent writes)
- Need to handle data replication (replicationFactor: 2)
- Storage requirements for retention period
Consider documenting these resource requirements in the README.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (8)
packages/apps/tenant/Chart.yaml(1 hunks)packages/apps/tenant/templates/monitoring.yaml(1 hunks)packages/apps/versions_map(1 hunks)packages/extra/monitoring/Chart.yaml(1 hunks)packages/extra/monitoring/templates/vm/vmcluster.yaml(2 hunks)packages/extra/monitoring/values.yaml(1 hunks)packages/extra/versions_map(1 hunks)packages/system/monitoring-agents/templates/vmagent.yaml(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- packages/apps/tenant/Chart.yaml
- packages/extra/monitoring/Chart.yaml
🔇 Additional comments (6)
packages/extra/versions_map (1)
20-21: Consider pinning all versions to specific commit references.Notably, you pinned version 1.5.3 but left 1.5.4 at
HEAD. Having a definitive commit reference can improve build reproducibility and avoid potential issues shouldHEADshift or introduce unexpected changes.packages/apps/versions_map (1)
98-99: Ensure consistency with version references.Line 98 updates
tenant 1.6.5to a specific commit, while line 99 introduces aHEADreference fortenant 1.6.6. If1.6.6is intended to be released soon, consider pinning against a specific commit to avoid disruptions in downstream builds and to maintain traceability.packages/apps/tenant/templates/monitoring.yaml (1)
29-29: Verify impact of reduced deduplication interval.The deduplication interval has been significantly reduced from 5m to 15s. While this provides more granular data, it could impact storage and processing requirements.
Run the following to check historical metrics and estimate the impact:
packages/extra/monitoring/templates/vm/vmcluster.yaml (2)
12-21: Resource configuration for vminsert looks good.The default resource limits and conditional logic are well-structured:
- Reasonable memory limits and requests
- Good error handling for undefined resources
- Proper template indentation
9-9: Dynamic configuration looks good.The templating of
retentionPeriodanddedup.minScrapeIntervalprovides good flexibility while maintaining consistency with the tenant configuration.Also applies to: 37-37
packages/extra/monitoring/values.yaml (1)
40-40: Verify impact of reduced deduplication interval.The deduplication interval has been significantly reduced from "5m" to "15s". While this provides more granular data and better real-time visibility, it could lead to:
- Increased storage usage
- Higher processing overhead
- Potential impact on system performance
Let's check for any related configurations or discussions:
✅ Verification successful
Let me analyze the search results to verify the impact of the deduplication interval change.
The search results show that the deduplication interval of "15s" is consistently set across multiple files:
- packages/extra/monitoring/values.yaml
- packages/apps/tenant/templates/monitoring.yaml
Additionally, there's a reference in vmcluster.yaml that uses this value:
packages/extra/monitoring/templates/vm/vmcluster.yaml: dedup.minScrapeInterval: {{ .deduplicationInterval }}The storage-related search didn't reveal any direct connection between the deduplication interval and storage configurations in the monitoring components. Let me search for more context about the deduplication configuration.
Based on the search results, I can now provide a comprehensive assessment of the deduplication interval change.
Deduplication interval change is aligned with retention periods
The search results reveal important context about the deduplication interval setting:
- The 15s deduplication interval is consistently applied across both short-term (3d) and long-term (14d) metrics storage:
- name: shortterm retentionPeriod: "3d" deduplicationInterval: "15s" - name: longterm retentionPeriod: "14d" deduplicationInterval: "15s"
The setting is used in VictoriaMetrics cluster configuration as
dedup.minScrapeIntervalThe configuration is properly synchronized across monitoring configurations in both the extra and tenant packages.
While the change from 5m to 15s does increase granularity, the impact is mitigated by:
- The relatively short retention periods (3d and 14d)
- The consistent application across storage tiers
- VictoriaMetrics' efficient deduplication mechanism
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for related deduplication configurations rg "deduplicationInterval" --type yaml # Search for storage-related configurations rg "storage:" --type yaml -A 3Length of output: 70230
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for deduplication-related configuration and documentation rg -A 3 "deduplication" --type yaml # Search for any comments or documentation about deduplication settings rg -B 3 "deduplicationInterval" --type yamlLength of output: 6991
| ## Example: | ||
| ## metricsStorages: | ||
| ## - name: shortterm | ||
| ## retentionPeriod: "3d" | ||
| ## deduplicationInterval: "15s" | ||
| ## storage: 10Gi | ||
| ## storageClassName: "" | ||
| ## vminsert: | ||
| ## resources: | ||
| ## limits: | ||
| ## memory: 1024Mi | ||
| ## requests: | ||
| ## cpu: 200m | ||
| ## memory: 512Mi | ||
| ## vmselect: | ||
| ## resources: | ||
| ## limits: | ||
| ## memory: 2048Mi | ||
| ## requests: | ||
| ## cpu: 300m | ||
| ## memory: 1Gi | ||
| ## vmstorage: | ||
| ## resources: | ||
| ## limits: | ||
| ## memory: 4096Mi | ||
| ## requests: | ||
| ## cpu: 500m | ||
| ## memory: 2Gi | ||
| ## |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Let me analyze the search results. The output shows resource specifications across various components in the repository, with particular focus on the Victoria Metrics operator and related components. Looking at the actual configuration in the review comment, I can see that the example values are well-balanced and align with typical resource requirements for monitoring components.
Resource specifications should be implemented as suggested in the example
The example configuration provides appropriate resource limits and requests that are well-balanced for a monitoring stack:
- vminsert: 512Mi-1024Mi memory, 200m CPU
- vmselect: 1Gi-2Gi memory, 300m CPU
- vmstorage: 2Gi-4Gi memory, 500m CPU
These values are reasonable because:
- They follow a graduated increase in resources based on component responsibilities
- They align with the resource patterns seen in the victoria-metrics-operator deployment
- Empty resource specifications (
resources: {}) could lead to resource contention and performance issues
🔗 Analysis chain
Consider implementing the example resource specifications.
The example configuration provides well-balanced resource limits and requests for each component. However, the actual configuration has empty resource specifications (resources: {}). This could lead to uncontrolled resource usage and potential performance issues.
Consider implementing resource specifications similar to the example:
- vminsert: 512Mi-1024Mi memory, 200m CPU
- vmselect: 1Gi-2Gi memory, 300m CPU
- vmstorage: 2Gi-4Gi memory, 500m CPU
Let's verify the current resource usage to help determine appropriate values:
Also applies to: 43-48, 54-59
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any existing resource specifications or related configurations
rg -A 5 'resources:' --type yaml
Length of output: 84789
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
packages/extra/monitoring/templates/vm/vmcluster.yaml (4)
12-21: LGTM! Consider documenting resource requirements.Good implementation of default resource limits with the ability to override. The defaults look reasonable for VMInsert.
Consider adding a comment explaining the minimum resource requirements and factors affecting resource consumption (e.g., number of active time series, ingestion rate).
25-33: Consider adjusting VMSelect resource defaults.While the configuration structure is good, VMSelect might benefit from different resource defaults than VMInsert due to its query-focused workload.
Consider adjusting the defaults based on your query patterns:
{{- if empty .vmselect.resources }} limits: - memory: 1000Mi + memory: 1500Mi requests: cpu: 100m - memory: 500Mi + memory: 750Mi
51-59: Verify VMStorage memory requirements.The increased memory limit (2048Mi) for VMStorage is good, but ensure it's sufficient for your data volume and retention period.
Consider the following factors for VMStorage sizing:
- Data ingestion rate
- Retention period (now configurable)
- Number of active time series
- Query patterns
You might need to adjust these limits based on monitoring metrics from production usage.
Line range hint
1-70: Consider adding monitoring guidelines.The configuration structure is well-designed with good defaults and override capabilities. To help users properly configure the cluster:
Consider adding documentation that covers:
- Recommended monitoring metrics for each component
- Scaling guidelines based on metrics
- Resource calculation formulas based on:
- Number of active time series
- Data retention period
- Query patterns
- High availability requirements
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
packages/extra/monitoring/templates/vm/vmcluster.yaml(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
packages/extra/monitoring/templates/vm/vmcluster.yaml (2)
9-9: LGTM! Verify retention period configuration.Good change to make retention period configurable via template variable.
Let's verify the retention period configuration:
✅ Verification successful
Retention period configuration is properly defined in values files
The retention period variable is properly defined in both
values.yamlandmonitoring.yamlfiles with appropriate values:
packages/extra/monitoring/values.yaml: Defined with values "3d", "14d", and "1"packages/apps/tenant/templates/monitoring.yaml: Defined with values "3d" and "14d"🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if retention period is defined in values files rg -A 5 "retentionPeriod:" packages/extra/monitoring/values.yaml packages/apps/tenant/templates/monitoring.yamlLength of output: 2432
37-37: Verify deduplication interval impact.Good change to make deduplication interval configurable, but we should verify its implications.
Let's check the configured values and usage:
✅ Verification successful
Deduplication interval configuration is properly defined and consistent
The verification shows that:
- The deduplication interval is consistently set to "15s" across both values files
- The variable
.deduplicationIntervalis properly defined in the values.yaml- It's used alongside other VM performance settings like
search.maxUniqueTimeseries- The change to make it configurable through template variable maintains the same default value
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check deduplication interval configuration rg -A 5 "deduplicationInterval:" packages/extra/monitoring/values.yaml packages/apps/tenant/templates/monitoring.yaml # Look for any related performance settings rg "search.maxUniqueTimeseries|maxSamplesPerSeries" packages/extra/monitoring/Length of output: 2170
| spec: | ||
| replicationFactor: 2 | ||
| retentionPeriod: "3" | ||
| retentionPeriod: {{ .retentionPeriod }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| quote is mandatory here because otherwise someday we will encounter an issue with scientific notation
klinch0
force-pushed
the
feature/add-resources-to-vmcluster
branch
from
ecd60c8 to
ba61c90
Compare
dosubot
bot
added
size:L
3 participants
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
Version Updates
Monitoring Configuration
Performance Improvements