Testing use cases for updated StatsD module tag separation

[ritalwar]

Although the changes made here seem straightforward and should not impact the existing statsd module functionality.
Can we test use cases for both scenarios (tags separated by ',' and ';') and ensure our current module is working fine?
A routine testing would be beneficial.

[aliabbas-elastic]

Testing Details

Test Setup

• Used a mock server to send custom format of metrics to StatsD module and verify the results
  • Formats verified:
    • DogStatsD
      <metric name>:<value>|<type>|@samplerate|#<k>:<v>,<k>:<v>
    • InfluxDB
      <metric name>,<k>=<v>,<k>=<v>:<value>|<type>|@samplerate
    • Graphite 1.1.x
      <metric name>;<k>=<v>;<k>=<v>:<value>|<type>|@samplerate

Test Case Scenarios

Test Case Summaries	Status
Verify that the metrics in format of DogStatsD are getting parsed	Pass 💚
Verify that the metrics in format of InfluxDB are getting parsed	Pass 💚
Verify that the metrics in format of Graphite 1.1.x are getting parsed	Pass 💚

For now we're good with the above supported formats but more I found here. Should we go on and support them as well?

cc:- @ritalwar @shmsr

[tehbooom]

@aliabbas-elastic Are we okay to merge or are we wanting to support other formats in this PR as well?

[aliabbas-elastic]

@aliabbas-elastic Are we okay to merge or are we wanting to support other formats in this #39619 as well?

IMO, We should merge the current PR as all the changes are working fine for the specified formats. We can raise for another formats if such enhancement requests come up. But I would like to confirm it with @ritalwar if this is OK to do.

[ritalwar]

Thanks @aliabbas-elastic !
Sure, let's merge the PR with the current supported versions, and we can address other formats when the need arises.