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

metrics: supply the metric on storage usage. #326

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

LykxSassinator
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This pr is used to supply the necessary metric on storage usage of engine.

@LykxSassinator
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cc @tabokie PTAL, thx.

Copy link
Member

@tabokie tabokie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why is this needed? raft_engine_log_file_count * file_size should be equivalent. If needed you can publish file_size via a separate counter.

@LykxSassinator
Copy link
Contributor Author

Why is this needed? raft_engine_log_file_count * file_size should be equivalent. If needed you can publish file_size via a separate counter.

From users, they think the usage of raft-engine is not clear as expected. They expect the storage size can be easily checked.

@tabokie
Copy link
Member

tabokie commented Aug 31, 2023

Why is this needed? raft_engine_log_file_count * file_size should be equivalent. If needed you can publish file_size via a separate counter.

From users, they think the usage of raft-engine is not clear as expected. They expect the storage size can be easily checked.

You can either add a counter for raft-engine file_size config in TiKV, then use file_count * file_size to display the size. Or manually flush the metrics in TiKV's EngineMetricsManager. The information is already there, I don't think it's worth adding another counter to raft-engine.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants