[improve][broker] Add metric prefix for topic_load_times - #20472
Conversation
|
|
||
| Metrics getTopicLoadMetrics() { | ||
| return getDimensionMetrics("topic_load_times", "topic_load", topicLoadStats); | ||
| return getDimensionMetrics("brk_topic_load_times", "topic_load", topicLoadStats); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Technoboy- Will it break the existing metrics system? As we discussed before, all the metrics changes should be started with a proposal since it might surprise the pulsar operators, and impact the alert system, and metrics system.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, I will create a PIP for this.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #20472 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 72.95% 72.92% -0.04%
+ Complexity 31914 31898 -16
============================================
Files 1867 1867
Lines 138485 138484 -1
Branches 15202 15202
============================================
- Hits 101037 100990 -47
- Misses 29438 29481 +43
- Partials 8010 8013 +3
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
codelipenghui
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Technoboy- Since the indicator name has been changed, could you please help add a test to avoid regression?
Demogorgon314
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. Do we have a unit test to cover this?
added |
I thought the current tests might cover this, but they didn't. So I have added the tests. Also during adding the tests, I find the indicator name should be "pulsar_xxx", not "brk_xxx", please also review again. |
d924e2d to
1d01a67
Compare
|
I've added the doc in apache/pulsar-site#631 |
Fix PIP-273 #20476
Motivation
topic_load_timeswas added by #507, it's too earlier. And then we added thepulsarprefix for all the metrics, but leaves it. So in order to keep the same prefix, we'd better update it.Documentation
docdoc-requireddoc-not-neededdoc-complete