Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Anonymized feature tracking for session cancelation #45103

Closed
2 tasks
nstewart opened this issue Feb 13, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #46778
Closed
2 tasks

Anonymized feature tracking for session cancelation #45103

nstewart opened this issue Feb 13, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #46778

Comments

@nstewart
Copy link
Contributor

nstewart commented Feb 13, 2020

Please add anonymized usage tracking for our basic session cancelation functionality. This will help the Product team track the adoption of the second of two commands required to expire user accounts, an important use case for our enterprise customers (#41396). This will ultimately help us improve feature usability and documentation.

  • CANCEL SESSION -> sql.session.cancel_one
  • CANCEL SESSIONS -> sql.session.cancel_query
@jordanlewis
Copy link
Member

@nstewart I don't understand - what's cancel_one mean? Maybe we just want cancel_session and cancel_sessions?

@nstewart
Copy link
Contributor Author

nstewart commented Mar 3, 2020

I'm indifferent -- I used cancel_query because our docs us a select statement as input to CANCEL_SESSIONS

image

I'm fine with cancel_session and cancel_sessions, I think that's more clear

I also noticed I had SESSIONS with cancel_one and SESSION with cancel_query, I fixed that in the original issue

craig bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 3, 2020
46778: sqltelemetry: add CANCEL QUERIES and CANCEL SESSIONS telemetry r=yuzefovich a=asubiotto

Release note: None (internal telemetry change)

Closes #45103

Not sure whether we want to distinguish between CANCEL QUERY vs QUERIES use and CANCEL SESSION vs SESSIONS use (or even how to). So just added one counter for each statement type which is probably good enough.

Tested this manually but holding off on writing tests since I've heard some work will be done on #46730 

Co-authored-by: Alfonso Subiotto Marques <alfonso@cockroachlabs.com>
@craig craig bot closed this as completed in 64d4df4 Apr 17, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants