Skip to content

Conversation

@SuperQ
Copy link
Contributor

@SuperQ SuperQ commented Jul 28, 2024

  • Use Prometheus naming best practices.
  • Enable native histograms.
  • Update dashboards to support new and old names.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 28, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 93.96%. Comparing base (fe84ab8) to head (9b05ca8).
Report is 114 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1560      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.88%   93.96%   +0.08%     
==========================================
  Files          78       79       +1     
  Lines        6361     5057    -1304     
==========================================
- Hits         5972     4752    -1220     
+ Misses        300      215      -85     
- Partials       89       90       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

* Use Prometheus [naming best
  practices](https://prometheus.io/docs/practices/naming/).
* Enable native histograms.
* Update dashboards to support new and old names.

Signed-off-by: SuperQ <[email protected]>
@0xERR0R 0xERR0R added the 🔨 enhancement New feature or request label Aug 2, 2024
@0xERR0R 0xERR0R added this to the v0.25 milestone Aug 2, 2024
@0xERR0R 0xERR0R self-assigned this Aug 7, 2024
Copy link
Owner

@0xERR0R 0xERR0R left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍 LGTM
thanks for your contribution! 🤝

@0xERR0R 0xERR0R merged commit 57b1bdb into 0xERR0R:main Aug 19, 2024
@SuperQ SuperQ deleted the metric_names branch August 19, 2024 19:54
@SuperQ
Copy link
Contributor Author

SuperQ commented Aug 19, 2024

@0xERR0R I was looking at the package layout for these metrics. I was going to open a PR to improve performance by moving the metrics to package local use. This would also eliminate the need for a bunch of inter-package channels and queuing.

But, I'm not sure this architectural change would be accepted.

@0xERR0R
Copy link
Owner

0xERR0R commented Aug 19, 2024

@SuperQ I'm not sure if I fully understand what you mean, but you can always create a PR with a proposal and we can discuss you solution. If it makes things more performant and simpler -> that would be great

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

🔨 enhancement New feature or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants