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

Fix pipelinerun_taskrun_duration_seconds metric #2849

Merged

Conversation

NavidZ
Copy link
Member

@NavidZ NavidZ commented Jun 23, 2020

Changes

This CL changes reporting taskrun duration as
part of pipelinerun metric to use knative
metrics Record API to match with the rest of the
existing metrics.

We have been using opensensus stats Record API for
reporting pipelinerun_taskrun_duration_seconds metric
as oppose to other metrics that we used knative metrics
API to report them. At this point only the metrics
that are reported with knative metrics are being
correctly plumbed to metrics backend. So as a result
pipelinerun_taskrun_duration_seconds was missing on
the metrics backend.

Submitter Checklist

These are the criteria that every PR should meet, please check them off as you
review them:

See the contribution guide for more details.

Double check this list of stuff that's easy to miss:

Reviewer Notes

If API changes are included, additive changes must be approved by at least two OWNERS and backwards incompatible changes must be approved by more than 50% of the OWNERS, and they must first be added in a backwards compatible way.

This CL changes reporting taskrun duration as
part of pipelinerun metric to use knative
metrics Record API to match with the rest of the
existing metrics.

We have been using opensensus stats Record API for
reporting pipelinerun_taskrun_duration_seconds metric
as oppose to other metrics that we used knative metrics
API to report them. At this point only the metrics
that are reported with knative metrics are being
correctly plumbed to metrics backend. So as a result
pipelinerun_taskrun_duration_seconds was missing on
the metrics backend.
@tekton-robot tekton-robot requested review from afrittoli and dibyom June 23, 2020 17:45
@tekton-robot tekton-robot added size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Jun 23, 2020
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @NavidZ. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a tektoncd member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR cannot be merged: expecting exactly one kind/ label

Available kind/ labels are:

kind/bug: Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug.
kind/flake: Categorizes issue or PR as related to a flakey test
kind/cleanup: Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt.
kind/design: Categorizes issue or PR as related to design.
kind/documentation: Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation.
kind/feature: Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
kind/misc: Categorizes issue or PR as a miscellaneuous one.

2 similar comments
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR cannot be merged: expecting exactly one kind/ label

Available kind/ labels are:

kind/bug: Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug.
kind/flake: Categorizes issue or PR as related to a flakey test
kind/cleanup: Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt.
kind/design: Categorizes issue or PR as related to design.
kind/documentation: Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation.
kind/feature: Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
kind/misc: Categorizes issue or PR as a miscellaneuous one.

@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR cannot be merged: expecting exactly one kind/ label

Available kind/ labels are:

kind/bug: Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug.
kind/flake: Categorizes issue or PR as related to a flakey test
kind/cleanup: Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt.
kind/design: Categorizes issue or PR as related to design.
kind/documentation: Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation.
kind/feature: Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
kind/misc: Categorizes issue or PR as a miscellaneuous one.

@NavidZ
Copy link
Member Author

NavidZ commented Jun 23, 2020

@hrishin do you happen to remember why we were using stats.Record in this instance? I can see the unittests are passing either way but I wasn't able to see the metric on StackDriver in the current state and using knative metrics.Record fixed it.

@NavidZ
Copy link
Member Author

NavidZ commented Jun 23, 2020

/kind bug

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. label Jun 23, 2020
@jlpettersson
Copy link
Member

/ok-to-test

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Jun 23, 2020
@NavidZ
Copy link
Member Author

NavidZ commented Jun 23, 2020

/retest

@hrishin
Copy link
Member

hrishin commented Jun 23, 2020

@hrishin do you happen to remember why we were using stats.Record in this instance? I can see the unittests are passing either way but I wasn't able to see the metric on StackDriver in the current state and using knative metrics.Record fixed it.

Wow, thats good catch @NavidZ, thank you!
I guess it bug and mistake happen during implementation 🤔 .(why its left as stats.record() instead of metrics.record()? )

Copy link
Member

@vdemeester vdemeester left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 24, 2020
@vdemeester
Copy link
Member

/retest

@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: vdemeester

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jun 24, 2020
@NavidZ
Copy link
Member Author

NavidZ commented Jun 24, 2020

@vdemeester the test failures seem weird. I wasn't able to reproduce them locally. I'm still looking into it.

I guess it bug and mistake happen during implementation 🤔 .(why its left as stats.record() instead of metrics.record()? )

@hrishin Alrighty. Good to know that it is safe to do have it used metrics.Record.

@vdemeester
Copy link
Member

/retest
@NavidZ yeah, lot's of flake these days on pipeline, we need to fix that..

@tekton-robot tekton-robot merged commit c944643 into tektoncd:master Jun 24, 2020
@NavidZ
Copy link
Member Author

NavidZ commented Jun 24, 2020

Just to link the issues. This change is related to #2814

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants