-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21.4k
swarm: initial instrumentation #15969
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
Merged
gbalint
merged 8 commits into
ethereum:master
from
nonsense:fork-go-metrics-for-resetting-timer-swarm-instrumentation
Feb 23, 2018
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
89dfc96
swarm: initial instrumentation with go-metrics
holisticode b7516e4
swarm: initialise metrics collection and add ResettingTimer to HTTP r…
nonsense 76dd62c
swarm: update metrics flags names. remove redundant Timer.
nonsense e05e4ca
swarm: rename method for periodically updating gauges
nonsense 5af18e3
swarm: finalise metrics after feedback
holisticode 661eeb7
swarm/network: always init kad metrics containers
nonsense 13aa42e
swarm/network: off-by-one index in metrics containers
nonsense e891d75
swarm, metrics: resolved conflicts
nonsense File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Again is this really a resolve failure? I'd expect the resolve failure metric to tell me how many times Swarm tried to actually resolve a name but failed. Perhaps my expectation is incorrect though?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My expectation was to capture how many times a resolve was attempted with the meaning of requested (count) and how many times these attempts failed, answering the question: "How many times did people request a resolution, and how many times this request failed?". Both expectations (mine and yours) can lead to mal-interpretations. We should just settle on one. I believe it makes sense to keep them for now, and then remove such metrics as we go when we realize we are not gaining anything from them. Still, if people think we should remove ones like this one right away, I am ok with it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it should be the other way around. Just add metrics we know are useful, with the freedom to add more useful ones in the future.
In this specific case, if I wanted to know how many resolve failures I'm getting, I'd also want to know what domains are failing too, in which case I'd probably just look for errors in my logs (which have much more context than just a single number).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When looking at failures, specifically in a production environment, but also in a staging/test environment, I would structure my workflow in creating alarms and visualizing error situations in a general manner first, like creating alarms when reaching certain thresholds. Only then I would, if the counters/graphs show unacceptable levels or alarms get triggered, I would then start the debugging process of looking at logs for why the alarms were triggered or why there is an unusual/unexpected high amount of errors. I believe this to be a very valid argument to keep this counter. Nevertheless, if it's still maintained that the counter itself is of no value, I will proceed to remove it.