Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 14, 2024. It is now read-only.

AutobatcherTelemetryComponents stores metric references #7266

Draft
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

schlosna
Copy link
Contributor

@schlosna schlosna commented Sep 7, 2024

General

Before this PR:

After this PR:

==COMMIT_MSG==
==COMMIT_MSG==

Priority:

Concerns / possible downsides (what feedback would you like?):

Is documentation needed?:

Compatibility

Does this PR create any API breaks (e.g. at the Java or HTTP layers) - if so, do we have compatibility?:

Does this PR change the persisted format of any data - if so, do we have forward and backward compatibility?:

The code in this PR may be part of a blue-green deploy. Can upgrades from previous versions safely coexist? (Consider restarts of blue or green nodes.):

Does this PR rely on statements being true about other products at a deployment - if so, do we have correct product dependencies on these products (or other ways of verifying that these statements are true)?:

Does this PR need a schema migration?

Testing and Correctness

What, if any, assumptions are made about the current state of the world? If they change over time, how will we find out?:

What was existing testing like? What have you done to improve it?:

If this PR contains complex concurrent or asynchronous code, is it correct? The onus is on the PR writer to demonstrate this.:

If this PR involves acquiring locks or other shared resources, how do we ensure that these are always released?:

Execution

How would I tell this PR works in production? (Metrics, logs, etc.):

Has the safety of all log arguments been decided correctly?:

Will this change significantly affect our spending on metrics or logs?:

How would I tell that this PR does not work in production? (monitors, etc.):

If this PR does not work as expected, how do I fix that state? Would rollback be straightforward?:

If the above plan is more complex than “recall and rollback”, please tag the support PoC here (if it is the end of the week, tag both the current and next PoC):

Scale

Would this PR be expected to pose a risk at scale? Think of the shopping product at our largest stack.:

Would this PR be expected to perform a large number of database calls, and/or expensive database calls (e.g., row range scans, concurrent CAS)?:

Would this PR ever, with time and scale, become the wrong thing to do - and if so, how would we know that we need to do something differently?:

Development Process

Where should we start reviewing?:

If this PR is in excess of 500 lines excluding versions lock-files, why does it not make sense to split it?:

Please tag any other people who should be aware of this PR:
@jeremyk-91
@sverma30
@raiju

@changelog-app
Copy link

changelog-app bot commented Sep 7, 2024

Generate changelog in changelog/@unreleased

What do the change types mean?
  • feature: A new feature of the service.
  • improvement: An incremental improvement in the functionality or operation of the service.
  • fix: Remedies the incorrect behaviour of a component of the service in a backwards-compatible way.
  • break: Has the potential to break consumers of this service's API, inclusive of both Palantir services
    and external consumers of the service's API (e.g. customer-written software or integrations).
  • deprecation: Advertises the intention to remove service functionality without any change to the
    operation of the service itself.
  • manualTask: Requires the possibility of manual intervention (running a script, eyeballing configuration,
    performing database surgery, ...) at the time of upgrade for it to succeed.
  • migration: A fully automatic upgrade migration task with no engineer input required.

Note: only one type should be chosen.

How are new versions calculated?
  • ❗The break and manual task changelog types will result in a major release!
  • 🐛 The fix changelog type will result in a minor release in most cases, and a patch release version for patch branches. This behaviour is configurable in autorelease.
  • ✨ All others will result in a minor version release.

Type

  • Feature
  • Improvement
  • Fix
  • Break
  • Deprecation
  • Manual task
  • Migration

Description

AutobatcherTelemetryComponents stores metric references

Check the box to generate changelog(s)

  • Generate changelog entry

@schlosna schlosna force-pushed the ds/autobatcher-telemetry branch from 3021a81 to 660e148 Compare September 7, 2024 13:58
Copy link
Contributor

@ergo14 ergo14 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

These metrics were used for some autobatcher perf analysis. With the recent metric review we've been doing, I considered the following:

  • Removing some of the extra percentiles
  • Remove the metrics
  • Guard the reporting of metrics behind log.isDebugEnabled

If the issue you are fixing is perf related, it might be better to just do the latter?

@schlosna
Copy link
Contributor Author

These popped up in some JFRs I was looking at for a 🏔️ service. I can push a separate PR to remove these if we no longer need them.

@ergo14
Copy link
Contributor

ergo14 commented Sep 18, 2024

These popped up in some JFRs I was looking at for a 🏔️ service. I can push a separate PR to remove these if we no longer need them.

I'd prefer to guard them against the debug log flag. We don't need them in steady state, but might want to enable in the future if we want to investigate the autobatcher perf again & possibly when support issues require it

@ergo14
Copy link
Contributor

ergo14 commented Nov 7, 2024

@schlosna Do you still want this? I think I can review this with your proposal (no need for debug guards, we did not find these to be contributing to metric load that much) if you are happy with it

@schlosna
Copy link
Contributor Author

schlosna commented Nov 7, 2024

Let me take another pass at some recent profiles to assess current overhead.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants