This is an optimization on the existing append in OOOChunk.
What we've been doing so far is find the place inside the out-of-order
slice where the new sample should go in and then place it there and move
any samples to the right if necessary. This is OK but requires a binary
search every time the slice is bigger than 0.
The optimization is opinionated and suggests that although out-of-order
samples can be out-of-order amongst themselves they'll probably be in
order thus we can probably optimistically append at the end and if not
do the binary search.
OOOChunks are capped to 30 samples by default so this is a small
optimization but everything adds up, specially if you handle many active
timeseries with out-of-order samples.
Signed-off-by: Jesus Vazquez <jesus.vazquez@grafana.com>
Signed-off-by: Jesus Vazquez <jesusvazquez@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Ganesh Vernekar <ganeshvern@gmail.com>
* adapt code.go and write_handler.go to support float histograms
* adapt watcher.go to support float histograms
* wip adapt queue_manager.go to support float histograms
* address comments for metrics in queue_manager.go
* set test cases for queue manager
* use same counts for histograms and float histograms
* refactor createHistograms tests
* fix float histograms ref in watcher_test.go
* address PR comments
Signed-off-by: Marc Tuduri <marctc@protonmail.com>
In most cases, there is no sample at `maxt`, so `PeekBack` has to be
used. So far, `PeekBack` did not return a float histogram, and we
disregarded even any returned normal histogram. This fixes both, and
also tweaks the unit test to discover the problem (by using an earlier
timestamp than "now" for the samples in the TSDB).
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
If a (float or integer) histogram is a gauge histogram, set the
CounterResetHint accordingly. (The default value is fine for the
normal counter histograms.)
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
This is to check if a gauge histogram can be appended to the given chunk.
If not, it tells what changes to make to the chunk and the histogram
if possible.
Signed-off-by: Ganesh Vernekar <ganeshvern@gmail.com>
* Update docs example rules for default config
The prometheus download includes a default config to scrape itself.
This self-scraping prometheus doesn't include any metric named as
`http_inprogress_requests`, but does include one named
`prometheus_http_requests_total`.
Updating this example rule in the docs to one which can be used
out-of-the-box with the default download would be a nice improvement.
Signed-off-by: Sam Jewell <sam.jewell@grafana.com>
* Update syntax as per @LeviHarrison's review
Co-authored-by: Levi Harrison <levisamuelharrison@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sam Jewell <2903904+samjewell@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Sam Jewell <sam.jewell@grafana.com>
Signed-off-by: Sam Jewell <2903904+samjewell@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Levi Harrison <levisamuelharrison@gmail.com>
Since the struct defines proxy_connect_header instead of proxy_connect_headers, all relevant occurences of it were replaced with the correct configuration name as defined in the HTTPClientConfig struct.
Signed-off-by: Robbe Haesendonck <googleit@inuits.eu>
With this commit, the parser stops to see a gauge histogram (whether
native or conventional) as an unexpected metric type. It ingests it
normally, it even sets the `GaugeHistogram` type in the metadata (as
it has already done for a conventional gauge histogram scraped using
OpenMetrics), but it otherwise treats it as a normal counter-like
histogram.
Once #11783 is merged, though, it should be very easy to utilize the
type information.
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
So far, the parser hasn't validated that the type is valid in the
`Next()` call. Later, in the `Series()` call, however, it assumes that
we will only see valid types and therefore panics with `encountered
unexpected metric type, this is a bug`.
This commit fixes said bug by adding validation to the `Next()` call.
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
In the head and in v1 postings on disk, it makes no difference whether
postings are sorted. Only for v2 does the code step through in order.
So, move the sorting to where it is required, and thus skip it entirely
in the head.
Label values in on-disk blocks are already sorted, but `slices.Sort` is
very fast on already-sorted data so we don't bother checking.
Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>
