fix(enrichment tables): emit _total-suffixed names for memory table counters#25811
fix(enrichment tables): emit _total-suffixed names for memory table counters#25811RajMandaliya wants to merge 8 commits into
Conversation
|
All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅ |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA |
…ounters Three memory enrichment table counters didn't end in _total, violating the instrumentation spec (docs/specs/instrumentation.md: "Counters MUST end with total"): - memory_enrichment_table_failed_insertions - memory_enrichment_table_failed_reads - memory_enrichment_table_ttl_expirations Both the old and new (_total-suffixed) names are now emitted simultaneously to avoid breaking existing scrape configs and dashboards. The old names are deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Fixes vectordotdev#25455
62722b5 to
ce91fc5
Compare
|
recheck |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 1f43dee068
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
|
I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA |
1f43dee to
b6bc4b6
Compare
github-actions
Bot
added
the
docs review on hold
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 6d9a5d7e4c
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: b289813f01
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 14831844b3
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ | |||
| Three memory enrichment table counters now also emit a `_total`-suffixed name to comply | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When this PR reaches the changelog CI check, this added fragment is rejected because the filename uses .deprecation.md; I checked scripts/check_changelog_fragments.sh, where FRAGMENT_TYPES is limited to breaking|security|feature|enhancement|fix, and MERGE_BASE=e51fa72fa986f0762529a11799085325924d6e8b^ ./scripts/check_changelog_fragments.sh fails with fragment type must be one of. Rename the fragment to a supported type such as .fix.md so the required changelog validation can pass.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Summary
Three
memory enrichment tablecounters didn't end in_total, violating the instrumentation spec (docs/specs/instrumentation.md: "Counters MUST end withtotal"):memory_enrichment_table_failed_insertionsmemory_enrichment_table_failed_readsmemory_enrichment_table_ttl_expirationsPer discussion on the issue, this should not be an immediately breaking change, so both the old and new (
_total-suffixed) names are now emitted simultaneously. The old names are marked deprecated in a doc comment and should be removed in a future release once consumers have had time to migrate.Vector configuration
N/A — this only affects internal metric names emitted by the
memoryenrichment table, not user-facing configuration.How did you test this PR?
cargo check— compiles cleanlycargo test --lib enrichment_tables::memory— all 16 existing tests passgrepthat the old metric name strings only appear in the two files intentionally touched (metric_name.rs,internal_events.rs), with no stale references elsewhere in.rs/.md/.cuefilesChange Type
Is this a breaking change?
Does this PR include user facing changes?
(Changelog fragment included:
changelog.d/25455_memory_enrichment_counter_total_suffix.deprecation.md)References
Notes
Ran
cargo checkand the relevant test suite locally; have not yet runmake fmt/make check-clippy/ fullmake test— will do before requesting review if not already green in CI.