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

Throttler: SelfMetric interface, simplify adding new throttler metrics #16469

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Jul 31, 2024

Conversation

shlomi-noach
Copy link
Contributor

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach commented Jul 24, 2024

Description

An internal cleanup/refactor. Intorducing no change in behavior.

This PR refactors how the throttler reads and treats the multi-metrics (lag, custom, threads_running, loadavg) by introducing the SelfMetric interface with implementing structs

This makes it easy to add new metrics: create a new self_metric_<name>.go, implement SelfMetric, register the metric, and you're good. The throttler will invoke the Read function for all registered metrics.

The PR cleans up even more code from the throttler, eliminating MySQLMetricConfigurationSettings., removing throttler's metricsQuery, and more.

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
  • If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: Throttler labels Jul 24, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Jul 24, 2024

Review Checklist

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

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

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

Backward compatibility

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

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Jul 24, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v21.0.0 milestone Jul 24, 2024
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

File was just renamed

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This file was mostly just renamed, but also some lines of code moved to other files. There isn't anything important to review here.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

File just renamed

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

New file, with some code extracted from elsewhere, but otherwise introducing nothing new. Nothing to review here.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

New file, with code moved from other files, but introducing nothing new. Nothing to review here.

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels Jul 24, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 24, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.24155% with 103 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.63%. Comparing base (e341f23) to head (edea801).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
go/vt/vttablet/tabletserver/throttle/throttler.go 24.24% 25 Missing ⚠️
...vttablet/tabletserver/throttle/base/self_metric.go 34.28% 23 Missing ⚠️
.../tabletserver/throttle/base/self_metric_loadavg.go 25.00% 18 Missing ⚠️
...tablet/tabletserver/throttle/base/metric_result.go 54.16% 11 Missing ⚠️
...blet/tabletserver/throttle/base/self_metric_lag.go 50.00% 8 Missing ⚠️
...vttablet/tabletserver/throttle/base/metric_name.go 86.11% 5 Missing ⚠️
.../tabletserver/throttle/base/self_metric_default.go 54.54% 5 Missing ⚠️
...etserver/throttle/base/self_metric_custom_query.go 60.00% 4 Missing ⚠️
...erver/throttle/base/self_metric_threads_running.go 60.00% 4 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #16469      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   68.62%   68.63%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1551     1558       +7     
  Lines      199515   199550      +35     
==========================================
+ Hits       136915   136963      +48     
+ Misses      62600    62587      -13     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

…ics can query it directly

Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach changed the title WIP: Throttler: SelfMetric interface, simplify adding new throttler metrics Throttler: SelfMetric interface, simplify adding new throttler metrics Jul 25, 2024
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach requested a review from a team July 25, 2024 07:13
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach marked this pull request as ready for review July 25, 2024 07:13
@shlomi-noach
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ready for review

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The parent for all metric types. Implement this to add a new metric.

Copy link
Contributor

@mattlord mattlord left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good! I only had a few minor suggestions/nits that you can resolve as you feel best.

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach requested a review from a team July 30, 2024 07:10
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach merged commit 2e79d16 into vitessio:main Jul 31, 2024
129 checks passed
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach deleted the throttler-metric-interface branch July 31, 2024 04:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: Throttler Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants