chore: Added PostgreSQL RFC #3612
Conversation
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
jamtur01
added
domain: metrics
jamtur01
requested review from
jszwedko,
lukesteensen,
JeanMertz and
binarylogic
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
| ```toml | ||
| [sources.my_source_id] | ||
| type = "postgresql_metrics" # required | ||
| address = "postgres://postgres@localhost" # required - address of the PG server. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just noting we'll probably want to call this endpoint per #3590
We've also leaned towards allowing multiple for sources (#3519 (comment)) so this would be endpoints.
This does make the databases config a bit weird when used with multiple dbs. You could just have the database in the URL ala JDBC to allow for things like postgres://postgres@localhost/database
If we do that, we'll probably also want to label metrics with the endpoint and host to allow differentiation downstream.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a bit messy as a UI. :( And adding the DB on the URL only solves for one DB per connection, what if I want two?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, it does feel messier. You could just specify the URL twice if you wanted two databases (or maybe do commas?), but I can see this would be weird for the common case of just wanting to monitor all databases on a given server. To that end, we should probably make it easy to just monitor all database (or provide a list of exclusions even). I think it's probably pretty common that I'd want to monitor all of them aside from the template* ones.
I think we should come up with a rule of thumb for when we should do single vs. multiple endpoints for a given source though; to ease the decision in the future.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmmm I've always assumed you'd specific the source twice for separate servers... Specifying the connection URL twice will double (or more for other DBs) the connections and mean multiple collections on a single DB server. I don't think that's a good performance experience for folks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I definitely agree in this case.
I'm wondering what you think about the apache_metrics case though. I did change it to endpoints in response to #3519 (comment) . The prometheus scraper also allows multiple endpoints.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel like Apache and PG are differently architected and hence monitored differently. Apache is a single server you're monitoring. Monitoring PG is monitoring one or more/all databases in a PG server. That additional level of granularity makes endpoints odd to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've reverted this to endpoint for now. We can discuss.
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just one question about namespacing / metric prefix, but otherwise this looks good to go.
Similar to #3581 (comment), I'm curious about letting people exclude databases rather than listing them all out, but we can always figure that out in a second pass as I think we can do it in a backwards compatible manner.
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net>
I've added a potential |
jamtur01
changed the title
|
I'm going to merge this and we can discuss questions as implementation unfolds. |
Signed-off-by: Brian Menges <brian.menges@anaplan.com>
Closes #3603