processor_labels: Add a documentation for processor_labels #1371
Conversation
cosmo0920
force-pushed
the
cosmo0920-add-processor-labels-doc
branch
2 times, most recently
from
37352e8
to
4a73996
Compare
Signed-off-by: Hiroshi Hatake <hiroshi@chronosphere.io>
cosmo0920
force-pushed
the
cosmo0920-add-processor-labels-doc
branch
from
4a73996
to
11bc012
Compare
This is because using hash algorithm is actually SHA-256. Signed-off-by: Hiroshi Hatake <hiroshi@chronosphere.io>
|
|
||
| | Key | Description | | ||
| | :---------- | :--- | | ||
| | update | Update an existing key with a value into metrics. The key-value pair is required. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What happens if it does not exist? Failure?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, just dismissed the operation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you clarify that in the docs? Some things seem to error and some ignore so useful to know.
| | update | Update an existing key with a value into metrics. The key-value pair is required. | | ||
| | insert | Insert a new key with a value into metrics. The key-value pair is required. | | ||
| | upsert | Upsert a specific key with a value, the `upsert` operation will try to update the value of the key. If the key does not exist, the key will be created. The key-value pair is required. | | ||
| | delete | Delete a key from the labels of metrics. The key-value pair is required. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What happens if it does not exist?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just ignored and dismissed in that case.
| | :---------- | :--- | | ||
| | update | Update an existing key with a value into metrics. The key-value pair is required. | | ||
| | insert | Insert a new key with a value into metrics. The key-value pair is required. | | ||
| | upsert | Upsert a specific key with a value, the `upsert` operation will try to update the value of the key. If the key does not exist, the key will be created. The key-value pair is required. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This seems like the option to always use :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, but it's both of effective whether existing the key or not. :)
| | Key | Description | | ||
| | :---------- | :--- | | ||
| | update | Update an existing key with a value into metrics. The key-value pair is required. | | ||
| | insert | Insert a new key with a value into metrics. The key-value pair is required. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What happens if it exists?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just ignored in that case on fluent/fluent-bit#8824 patch.
| | insert | Insert a new key with a value into metrics. The key-value pair is required. | | ||
| | upsert | Upsert a specific key with a value, the `upsert` operation will try to update the value of the key. If the key does not exist, the key will be created. The key-value pair is required. | | ||
| | delete | Delete a key from the labels of metrics. The key-value pair is required. | | ||
| | hash | Replace the key value with a hash generated by the SHA-256 algorithm from the specified label name, the binary value generated is finally set as an hex string representation. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Weirdly specific option - can we change the hash algorithm and other stuff in the future?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure. But I suppose that we shouldn't do this. Because there is no reason to use weaker hash algorithms such as SHA-1 or MD5.
Signed-off-by: Pat <patrick.j.k.stephens@gmail.com>
Corresponding to fluent/fluent-bit#8824