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

stats/prometheus: normalize labels for single-label implementations #12057

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 10, 2023

Conversation

vmg
Copy link
Collaborator

@vmg vmg commented Jan 9, 2023

Description

Here's a bug we've found in production: when exporting Prometheus metrics, the name of the labels is not consistent when using Single-Label metrics vs Multi-Label metrics. More precisely, the Single-Label metrics API does not perform label normalization (i.e. from CamelCase to snake_case), while the Multi-Label API does perform this normalization.

The normalization into snake_case is sensible, as metric names in Prometheus are idiomatically written in snake case, so the lack of normalization when using single-label metrics feels like an oversight that caused our Prometheus metrics exports to report the wrong metrics.

After this change, the behavior between using a Single-Label metric and a Multi-Label metric with just one label is consistent. This is, however, a breaking change so it should be noted in the release notes.

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #12058

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

@vmg vmg added Type: Bug Breaking change Component: Observability Pull requests that touch tracing/metrics/monitoring release notes (needs details) This PR needs to be listed in the release notes in a dedicated section (deprecation notice, etc...) labels Jan 9, 2023
@vmg vmg requested a review from deepthi as a code owner January 9, 2023 15:16
@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Jan 9, 2023

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • If this is a change that users need to know about, please apply the release notes (needs details) label so that merging is blocked unless the summary release notes document is included.
  • If a test is added or modified, there should be a documentation on top of the test to explain what the expected behavior is what the test does.

If a new flag is being introduced:

  • Is it really necessary to add this flag?
  • Flag names should be clear and intuitive (as far as possible)
  • Help text should be descriptive.
  • Flag names should use dashes (-) as word separators rather than underscores (_).

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow should be required, the maintainer team should be notified.

Bug fixes

  • There should be at least one unit or end-to-end test.
  • The Pull Request description should include a link to an issue that describes the bug.

Non-trivial changes

  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.

New/Existing features

  • Should be documented, either by modifying the existing documentation or creating new documentation.
  • New features should have a link to a feature request issue or an RFC that documents the use cases, corner cases and test cases.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from VTop, if used there.

Signed-off-by: Vicent Marti <vmg@strn.cat>
@dbussink dbussink removed the release notes (needs details) This PR needs to be listed in the release notes in a dedicated section (deprecation notice, etc...) label Jan 9, 2023
}
for _, line := range expect {
if !strings.Contains(response.Body.String(), line) {
t.Fatalf("Expected result to contain %s, got %s", line, response.Body.String())
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ideally we would use assert/require but I see that the whole file is currently using t.Fatalf 😞

@vmg vmg merged commit 27e642b into vitessio:main Jan 10, 2023
@vmg vmg deleted the vmg/prometheus-labels-fix branch January 10, 2023 08:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Breaking change Component: Observability Pull requests that touch tracing/metrics/monitoring Type: Bug
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Bug Report: Prometheus metrics reporting doesn't snake case single label setups
3 participants