-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
recommender: fix instrumentation and add tests #230
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This pull request does not contain a valid label. Please add one of the following labels: bug, enhancement, refactoring, documentation, tooling, dependencies
@@ -29,7 +29,10 @@ const ( | |||
transitionPromLabel = "transition" | |||
lifecycleStatus = "lifecycle_status" | |||
monitorName = "monitor_name" | |||
monitorNamespace = "monotor_namespace" | |||
monitorNamespace = "monitor_namespace" | |||
clientPromLabel = "client" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The recommender
or target/target_url
name was perhaps more meaningful. As it's a not generic HTTP Client but only dedicated to call recommenders.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sure, but these metrics could be used for any http call (now that they are in "metrics") - and client contains the url of the recommender when it's a recommender
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fair point, the metrics should be more specific then I think, but LGTM
Fix recommender metrics ("recommender" != "client")