Updates prometheus java_client to 1.3.2 #1009
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
lfrancke
force-pushed
the
feat/update-prometheus
branch
from
2f3981b to
2de7619
Compare
This is mainly to fix a performance regression Signed-off-by: Lars Francke <git@lars-francke.de>
Signed-off-by: Doug Hoard <dhoard@users.noreply.github.com>
|
@lfrancke Thanks for the PR!!! I merged the code/made an update to fix the build. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is mainly to fix a performance regression that got introduced in JMX Exporter 1.0.0 with the switch to the new Prometheus Java Client.
We traced it down to a problem that others have found (and fixed) before us:
Both of these are fixed in java_client 1.3.2 and performance is back to normal.
For comparison. Assembling metrics took less than 500ms on 0.20 but took over a minute on 1.0.1
btw. the CONTRIBUTING file says to open PRs against
developmentbut no such branch exists and thenext-releasebranch hasn't been updated in three years so I guessmainis correct andCONTRIBUTING.mdis wrong? If so, I'm happy to update it.It also says to address the maintainers using "@".... but that just feels so wrong so I'll just ping one of you @dhoard