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

Prometheus Remote Write Exporter (6/6) #227

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Dec 22, 2020

Conversation

AzfaarQureshi
Copy link
Contributor

@AzfaarQureshi AzfaarQureshi commented Dec 2, 2020

Description

This is PR 2/6 of adding a Prometheus Remote Write Exporter in Python SDK and address Issue open-telemetry/opentelemetry-python#1302

Part 1/6

  • Adds class skeleton
  • Adds all function signatures

Part 2/6

  • Adds validation of exporter constructor commands
  • Add unit tests for validation

Part 3/6

  • Adds conversion methods from OTel metric types to Prometheus TimeSeries
  • Add unit tests for conversion

Part 4/6

  • Adds methods to export metrics to Remote Write endpoint
  • Add unit tests for exporting

Part 5/6

  • Add integration tests

👉 Part 6/6

  • Add README, Design Doc and other necessary documentation.
  • Add sample app running in dockerized environment

Type of change

  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

How Has This Been Tested?

Readme and documentation changes

Does This PR Require a Core Repo Change?

  • Yes. - Link to PR:
  • No.

Checklist:

  • Followed the style guidelines of this project
  • Changelogs have been updated
  • Unit tests have been added
  • Documentation has been updated
    cc- @shovnik, @alolita

@AzfaarQureshi AzfaarQureshi requested review from a team, owais and hectorhdzg and removed request for a team December 2, 2020 00:10
@AzfaarQureshi AzfaarQureshi force-pushed the 5-prometheus-remote-write branch from 59b04ac to fe93e0d Compare December 2, 2020 00:21
@AzfaarQureshi AzfaarQureshi force-pushed the 5-prometheus-remote-write branch 3 times, most recently from 4885d1b to 5358eb6 Compare December 9, 2020 19:15
Supported Aggregators
---------------------

- Sum
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think exposing the supported aggregators is great. Just wondering if we should actually just link to the metrics sdk definitions, so we don't have to always update this file when the sdk supports more aggregations.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Due to differences between the aggregator data model and Prometheus's TimeSeries definition, each aggregator is actually converted separately to theTimeSeries format. So even if the SDK adds more aggregators, this exporter might not be able to work with them unless a conversion method is added here :/

That's why I thought it would be worth explicitly listing out which aggregators are supported

Copy link
Contributor

@lzchen lzchen Dec 14, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It would be nice to include a short description of what how these aggregators will behave and how they will accumulate the values.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thats a good idea, I added a link to the relevant section in the metric spec instead in case the behavior is subject to change

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I thought the point of listing out the aggregators was because they are the ones that Prometheus supports? We should be linking to Prometheus documentation of supported aggregators and what they do, instead of linking to OpenTelemetry documentation.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are exporting OTLP metrics to Prometheus remote write integrated back-ends in timeseries format so despite the name, we never actually touch Prometheus metrics any step along the way, we bypass the Prometheus format. The only link is that our timeseries are in the same format Prometheus metrics would be if they were exported to these back-ends. We thought users would be interested to know how exactly their OTLP aggregations would be once converted to timeseries since that is what they will see on the back-end. We could also link to the Prometheus documentation that guide us on the timeseries format, but I think the OTLP aggregation documentation is important to understand what the exporter did to a user's metrics.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

as per our meeting today, I've added a table comparing the OTLP aggegator with its equivalent Prometheus data type

@AzfaarQureshi AzfaarQureshi force-pushed the 5-prometheus-remote-write branch from e8a98c6 to 46a5169 Compare December 11, 2020 21:52
@AzfaarQureshi AzfaarQureshi force-pushed the 5-prometheus-remote-write branch 3 times, most recently from 4cc438a to 2d5e7c6 Compare December 16, 2020 01:52
Copy link
Contributor

@lzchen lzchen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice.

.flake8 Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
CHANGELOG.md Show resolved Hide resolved
@AzfaarQureshi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@lzchen @codeboten Hey, is this ready to be merged? 😃

@alertedsnake
Copy link
Contributor

Out of curiosity, is there a reason that python-snappy is not listed as a requirement in setup.cfg?

@shovnik
Copy link
Contributor

shovnik commented Dec 22, 2020

@alertedsnake Yes, for some reason, the python-snappy module depends on the snappy library which must separately installed with apt, rpm or brew as described here: https://github.com/andrix/python-snappy. This means adding the python-snappy module to the setup.cfg by itself fails due to missing its snappy.h include. We could not find a way to add a C++ dependency so we detailed how to install python-snappy correctly in the README instead. If you know of any workaround, please let us know.

@alertedsnake
Copy link
Contributor

Yep, your docs are pretty clear but I still think adding the dependency in setup.py is the right choice - of course installation will fail if the C library is not installed, but that's a requirement for the upstream package, and I think the error printed if one is missing it is quite clear.

@AzfaarQureshi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@alertedsnake makes sense! I've added it back

@AzfaarQureshi AzfaarQureshi force-pushed the 5-prometheus-remote-write branch 3 times, most recently from 26c9059 to 73b012c Compare December 22, 2020 18:08
Azfaar Qureshi added 5 commits December 22, 2020 13:52
adding sample app

adding examples readme

fixing lint errors

linting examples

updating readme tls_config example

excluding examples

adding examples to exclude in all linters

adding isort.cfg skip

changing isort to path

ignoring yml only

adding it to excluded directories in pylintrc

only adding exclude to directory

removing readme.rst and adding explicit file names to ignore

adding the rest of the files

adding readme.rst back

adding to ignore glob instead

reverting back to ignore list

converting README.md to README.rst
@AzfaarQureshi AzfaarQureshi force-pushed the 5-prometheus-remote-write branch from 73b012c to 4ed2a18 Compare December 22, 2020 18:52
@lzchen lzchen merged commit f6f5b90 into open-telemetry:master Dec 22, 2020
@vasireddy99 vasireddy99 deleted the 5-prometheus-remote-write branch October 13, 2022 16:52
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 this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants