Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Expose own metrics in /metrics/peer/ #754

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 28, 2020

Conversation

hsanjuan
Copy link
Contributor

Rationaly here is that any metric scraper should support be configured in the
same way regardless of the peer. By skipping a handler for the current peer we
are creating an "exception" unique to every peer, which only makes things more
difficult to maintain on infra-side of things.

Also, chances are the index mapping is somehow borked, since in my tests it is
sometimes skipping the current node and sometimes a different node, so this might
fix that altogether.

Rationaly here is that any metric scraper should support be configured in the
same way regardless of the peer. By skipping a handler for the current peer we
are creating an "exception" unique to every peer, which only makes things more
difficult to maintain on infra-side of things.

Also, chances are the index mapping is somehow borked, since in my tests it is
sometimes skipping the current node and sometimes a different node, so this might
fix that altogether.
@willscott willscott merged commit d9782a2 into master Sep 28, 2020
@willscott willscott deleted the feat/expose-own-metrics-in-peers branch September 28, 2020 15:17
hsanjuan added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2020
Rationaly here is that any metric scraper should support be configured in the
same way regardless of the peer. By skipping a handler for the current peer we
are creating an "exception" unique to every peer, which only makes things more
difficult to maintain on infra-side of things.

Also, chances are the index mapping is somehow borked, since in my tests it is
sometimes skipping the current node and sometimes a different node, so this might
fix that altogether.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants