nixos/grafana: refactor for RFC42 #191768

KFearsoff · 2022-09-18T09:55:13Z

This PR aims to refactor Grafana towards the RFC42 style, solving #191464 and #144575, while preserving backwards compatibility.

Description of changes

Grafana is refactored
Grafana datasource provisioning is refactored
Grafana dashboard provisioning is refactored
~~Grafana notifier provisioning is refactored~~ Decided against it, as notifiers will be deprecated in Grafana 10
Grafana alerting provisioning is added

Things done

KFearsoff · 2022-09-26T16:11:30Z

Everything major except for Grafana refactoring is done. Some minor things are (not all of which I have it in me to do):

Add descriptions to new alerting.* options simialar to new descriptions for dashboards options
The warning about storing passwords in Nix store doesn't work with new config style, fix it
Maybe tests can be refactored to implement more DRY
Probably can add a bit more NixOS options for alerting.* stuff
Find a nicer way to assert for alerting.* stuff, if possible. We currently declare settings as nullOr submodule and make default value a null. An empty submodule isn't actually a {}, so we can't check settings against a {}, and Nix doesn't currently have an "empty submodule" struct. This is described in detail here: NixOS: default = {} for submodule not respected #112494
Increase stylistic consistency (how array of attrs are written, convert everything into YAML instead of JSON, etc.)
Fix markdown docs

KFearsoff · 2022-10-11T23:27:30Z

The Grafana settings part is done, so I consider the PR ready for initial review.

Some things still left to do:

~~[ ] Add services.grafana.path analogous to other path options to provision Grafana config with a INI file (should we make the path thingie an RFC, actually?)~~
The warning about plaintext passwords is removed for the time being while I'm figuring out how to use it with new syntax. It should also be modified to pop up at correct times (namely: when a password isn't specified with file)
Fix NixOS doc build

nixos/tests/grafana/default.nix

nixos/modules/services/monitoring/grafana.nix

Ma27 · 2022-10-14T21:27:57Z

All in all it looks pretty nice, just left a few minor comments :)

Will test it later, but that's a bit more effort because I have to cherry-pick it to my 22.05-based tracking-branch and it has a bunch of conflicts because lib.mdDoc 🙃

nixos/modules/services/monitoring/grafana.nix

Ma27

Just deployed my local Grafana with this. All in all, it looks good. I'd like to give others a chance to review. As soon as the remaining things are resolved, I'd merge then.

Thanks a lot!

This commit refactors `services.grafana.provision.dashboards` towards the RFC42 style. To preserve backwards compatibility, we have to jump through a ton of hoops, introducing esoteric type signatures and bizarre structs. The Grafana module definition should hopefully become a lot cleaner after a release cycle or two once the old configuration style is completely deprecated.

pschyska · 2022-10-24T15:13:15Z

@KFearsoff Great, thank you ;-)
FWIW, I think server.protocol needs to be defined because the modules does something extra for server.protocol = "socket". Maybe just make it types.str?

KFearsoff · 2022-10-24T15:54:07Z

New PR open at #197585
cc @delroth @pschyska @Ma27

@KFearsoff Great, thank you ;-) FWIW, I think server.protocol needs to be defined because the modules does something extra for server.protocol = "socket". Maybe just make it types.str?

It actually isn't used anywhere. But I think using types.enum is more fitting here, and it doesn't cost a lot. I don't think that server.protocol will be updated in anything but major Grafana updates, and those need more care anyway.

Flake lock file updates: • Updated input 'home-manager': 'github:nix-community/home-manager/c485669ca529e01c1505429fa9017c9a93f15559' (2022-10-20) → 'github:nix-community/home-manager/7dc4e4ebd71280842b4d30975439980baaac9db8' (2022-10-24) • Updated input 'nixpkgs': 'github:nixos/nixpkgs/301aada7a64812853f2e2634a530ef5d34505048' (2022-10-21) → 'github:nixos/nixpkgs/f994293d1eb8812f032e8919e10a594567cf6ef7' (2022-10-25) Includes Grafana module refactoring from <NixOS/nixpkgs#191768>. Had to fix the following warnings: trace: warning: The option `services.grafana.domain' defined in `hosts/azazel/ogion.cz/monitor' has been renamed to `services.grafana.settings.server.domain'. trace: warning: Provisioning Grafana datasources with options has been deprecated. Use `services.grafana.provision.datasources.settings` or `services.grafana.provision.datasources.path` instead. trace: warning: Provisioning Grafana dashboards with options has been deprecated. Use `services.grafana.provision.dashboards.settings` or `services.grafana.provision.dashboards.path` instead. trace: Obsolete option `services.grafana.domain' is used. It was renamed to `services.grafana.settings.server.domain'. trace: Obsolete option `services.grafana.port' is used. It was renamed to `services.grafana.settings.server.http_port'.

SuperSandro2000 · 2022-10-26T22:44:22Z

Going to add the default value for services.grafana.settings.server.socket back.

#197987

SuperSandro2000 · 2022-10-27T19:16:03Z

nixos/modules/services/monitoring/grafana.nix

+        default = [];
+        apply = x: if (builtins.isList x) then map _filter x else x;
+        type = with types; either (listOf grafanaTypes.dashboardConfig) (submodule {
+          options.settings = mkOption {


This option does not show up in search.nixos.org which makes migration really hard.

Interesting. Apparently, datasources also don't show up. Same for man configuration.nix. Might be due to the really weird type. I don't even know where to approach the issue, unfortunately.

That's basically what we discussed in #191768 (comment).

Don't have a strong opinion whether this should be fixed in the module-system or whether we should just drop the either and force the submodule here. (If I had to guess I'd say that mkRenamedOptionModule doesn't work here because one is a sub-option of another option, but we could probably create a custom submodule-type which throws a more intuitive warning when a list is used for dashboards/datasources).

I wonder how specific of an issue it is to either, exactly. Is it possible to use oneOf here instead?
I still don't exactly see a different data type here, unfortunately. Is there an existing issue for the either problem?

There is now: #207962

dhess · 2022-10-29T13:16:45Z

I appreciate the effort and support the idea of moving to RFC42-style configuration across the board, but between dropping whole sections of previously-supported configuration without a migration strategy (e.g., extraOptions) and the bug with nested configuration in INI generation — especially given the auth configuration's reliance on nested config for any OAuth configuration — personally, I don't think this PR should have been merged as-is.

KFearsoff · 2022-10-29T18:16:42Z

but between dropping whole sections of previously-supported configuration without a migration strategy (e.g., extraOptions)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the settings pattern is already a migration strategy? Everything that you could stuff into extraOptions, you can stuff into settings, because extraOptions is just a different way of providing the same settings.
Perhaps an example would help. Personally, I think the bigger problem is the fact that not every setting even worked properly.

and the bug with nested configuration in INI generation

Yeah, that was... bad. I didn't even consider that INI might not support nested attrs, nor do I think that many people thought that it wouldn't. The misleading warning certainly doesn't help either.
Since then, I fixed the warning, so it should be better. The main problem persists, though. I opened an issue to track the progress on that: #197598, and I also tried to fix it myself, but no luck so far.

personally, I don't think this PR should have been merged as-is

I agree. There was quite a number of bugs (and there still are bugs, and pretty nasty ones that can't be fixed easily, like the fact that there's no more documentation, yikes). I've put in effort to fix them ASAP, but the damage is already done. I hope I've done as good of a job of salvaging the situation as I think I did, though.

Frankly, I'm unsure of how to handle the situation better next time. Doing more reviews would certainly help, but the scope of the PR is pretty gigantic, so people aren't too keen on doing that (can you blame them?). The manual and automatic testing that I've done didn't prevent the problems from leaking (once again, due to the gigantic scope). I'm also unsure if doing it in multiple PRs would help: the starting point looked very different from what we ended up with, the fact that I could edit the history freely helped a lot.

sternenseemann · 2022-10-30T20:50:42Z

nixos/doc/manual/release-notes/rl-2211.section.md

@@ -272,6 +272,12 @@ Available as [services.patroni](options.html#opt-services.patroni.enable).

 - The `services.matrix-synapse` systemd unit has been hardened.

+- The `services.grafana` options were converted to a [RFC 0042](https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/blob/master/rfcs/0042-config-option.md) configuration.


This changelog entry is pretty much useless. The changelog should help users updating to figure out what they need to change. This technical justification is completely irrelevant – it should much rather tell people what they can expect to change and ideally how they need to change what in order to be able to update.

You shouldn't need to read an RFC just to get a vague idea what you need to change in your grafana configuration.

sternenseemann · 2022-10-30T20:52:37Z

nixos/modules/services/monitoring/grafana.nix

      };
    };
-
-    extraOptions = mkOption {


I'm very frustrated at the moment at how this was removed – the error message you get is as unhelpful as possible. There should at least be an error message informing users how to migrate to the new style and ideally a compatibility shim (maybe with a deprecation warning) since adapting seems nontrivial.

sternenseemann · 2022-10-30T20:55:50Z

I agree. There was quite a number of bugs (and there still are bugs, and pretty nasty ones that can't be fixed easily, like the fact that there's no more documentation, yikes). I've put in effort to fix them ASAP, but the damage is already done. I hope I've done as good of a job of salvaging the situation as I think I did, though.

Reverting would also have been an option (although it seems people have already started migrating their configuration), this would also have alleviated the pressure on you to get this done in time for the 22.11 release which is coming up relatively quickly.

KFearsoff · 2022-10-30T21:27:26Z

Reverting would also have been an option (although it seems people have already started migrating their configuration), this would also have alleviated the pressure on you to get this done in time for the 22.11 release which is coming up relatively quickly.

Frankly, I was very surprised the merge happened before 22.11 release, I was assuming it will be there later (apparently, it hasn't landed in the stable branch yet, which I hope will continue to be the case). Perhaps it is my own misunderstanding of "Added a release notes entry if the change is significant" line: I considered that to be a hard requirement, not a sign of the readniess to merge.

As for the documentation part, can you please share the pain points you've encountered? I am very bad at writing documentation (and I don't particularly like the process), so I mostly just copy-pasted the release note from some other module. I don't think I've seen RFC42 migrations describing the exact details on how to do them, even though I do agree that this is not a good UX. I will try to make the most out of it.

As a side note: over half of the actual documentation vanished completely due to the bug with how documentation is rendered when types.either is used. I am immensely salty about that and how there's no easy fix. I'm also not too familiar with how release notes are even written: from my understanding of it, there's no space for proper description of the migration path. Perhaps someone knows more about the conventions that are currently in play in NixOS release notes?

As another side note: oh God. With the half of the documentation gone due to a bug, and the release notes not being rendered because they aren't even up, the migration path really is horrific. I might have picked a wrong "good first issue", huh.

sternenseemann · 2022-10-30T21:58:59Z

apparently, it hasn't landed in the stable branch yet, which I hope will continue to be the case

It won't land in 22.05, but it will be part of 22.11 when it is branched off.

As for the documentation part, can you please share the pain points you've encountered?

I have never used the module, but happened to upgrade a machine where this module was used. The error I ran into was the removal of extraOptions which just tells you that the option doesn't exist – it seems like it is missing a mkRemovedOptionModule at the very least.

from my understanding of it, there's no space for proper description of the migration path

The release notes are quite big, you can't give a step by step guide of course, but I think taking a few paragraphs to give an outline of what was removed in favor of what should be fine. It is also easier to remove superfluous information during release note editing than adding missing information…

As another side note: oh God. With the half of the documentation gone due to a bug, and the release notes not being rendered because they aren't even up, the migration path really is horrific. I might have picked a wrong "good first issue", huh.

These things happen and we can sort them out! In this instance it seems to be a case of unfortunate timing, sadly.

Ma27 · 2022-10-30T22:21:08Z

Yeah sorry, I underestimated the impact of the documentation problems, apologies for that!
To get this to an end, I'll take care of that (and check which other things are also to be fixed) by tomorrow!

KFearsoff · 2022-10-31T08:44:55Z

It won't land in 22.05, but it will be part of 22.11 when it is branched off.

Oof.

I have never used the module, but happened to upgrade a machine where this module was used. The error I ran into was the removal of extraOptions which just tells you that the option doesn't exist – it seems like it is missing a mkRemovedOptionModule at the very least.

Oh, the mkRemovedOptionModule is my bad for sure, will fix.

The release notes are quite big, you can't give a step by step guide of course, but I think taking a few paragraphs to give an outline of what was removed in favor of what should be fine. It is also easier to remove superfluous information during release note editing than adding missing information…

That's fair. Okay, I'll try to outline how the migration should be done in a separate PR.

Ma27 · 2022-10-31T08:58:27Z

Oof.

Well, it would've landed in a release sooner or later anyways and we still have a month until it's actually released, that should be enough to fix documentation and resolve remaining regressions.

Wait, are you planning to take care of it, not that we duplicate work now.

KFearsoff · 2022-10-31T09:14:40Z

Wait, are you planning to take care of it, not that we duplicate work now.

I was going to start later today, feeling 8 hours from now. I don't mind you starting earlier and me reviewing the PR, though!

Ma27 · 2022-10-31T15:49:46Z

OK, summary of what's problematic:

documentation for certain sub-options from provisioning
migration guide
getting rid of default secrets (nixos/grafana: drop insecure default secrets #198113)
anything else I'm forgetting right now?

First of all, I'd like to apologize, I missed a few parts upon reviewing this and I'll do my best to not let this happen again.

I'll start a PR to fix up the documentation stuff now.

Ma27 · 2022-10-31T17:09:42Z

OK, my friends' cat is telling me that I've done enough work today and wants to cuddle now, so expect a PR by tomorrow. I'm currently fixing the missing options in the docs issue.
@KFearsoff if you want to take care of improving the release notes (for a migration guide), feel free otherwise I'll do it tomorrow as well.

Ma27 · 2022-11-02T11:00:47Z

Fix for the missing opts is on the following branch: https://github.com/Ma27/nixpkgs/tree/grafana-fixup

As soon as I've taken care of the releas-enotes I'll file a PR.

Ma27 · 2022-11-02T11:36:25Z

Here we go: #199150.

I assume that this and #198113 need to go into master before branchoff and we're good or am I missing somethign else?

KFearsoff · 2022-11-02T11:49:59Z

I assume that this and #198113 need to go into master before branchoff and we're good or am I missing somethign else?

The #198113 is a little bit in the air for me, but I don't mind it getting merged once the changes I requested I made. Otherwise, I think looks good?

nixos/modules/services/monitoring/grafana-image-renderer.nix

ju1m · 2022-11-04T00:14:19Z

I guess settings.analytics.check_for_updates should be set to false by default since updates are NixOS' responsability. But I may be wrong, I don't know grafana well enough.

KFearsoff · 2022-11-04T14:02:07Z

I guess settings.analytics.check_for_updates should be set to false by default since updates are NixOS' responsability. But I may be wrong, I don't know grafana well enough.

As far as I can tell, the option should be pretty harmless since it only polls if there's an update, never tries to update anything, as stated in the docs: https://grafana.com/docs/grafana/latest/setup-grafana/configure-grafana/#check_for_updates .
I guess we might as well turn it off (why poll Github when we can, like, not do that?), but I'm not sure. For the time being, I'd like to play it safe and leave as much settings as possible to match defaults.

nixos/grafana: documentation/warning improvements after #191768

* //ops/machines/whitby: Disable grafana, since the grafana module was changed upstream in a way that our configuration no longer works. Since the OpenSSL security update is relatively pressing, adapting the grafana configuration beforehand is not a hard requirement. See NixOS/nixpkgs#191768. * //tools/depotfmt: keep Go at version 1.18 to forgo a reformat of the tree. * //nix/buildGo: keep Go at version 1.18, as 1.19 changed the CLI interface (?) in a way that breaks buildGo. * //3p/overlays/tvl: drop upstreamed tdlib upgrade. * //3p/overlays/tvl: patch buf to work around breakage due to git 2.38.1 TODO items for Go are tracked in b/215. Change-Id: Ie08fef49cf3db12e6b5225a8b992a990ddc5b642 Reviewed-on: https://cl.tvl.fyi/c/depot/+/7141 Tested-by: BuildkiteCI Autosubmit: sterni <sternenseemann@systemli.org> Reviewed-by: grfn <grfn@gws.fyi> Reviewed-by: tazjin <tazjin@tvl.su>

github-actions bot added 6.topic: nixos Issues or PRs affecting NixOS modules, or package usability issues specific to NixOS 8.has: changelog 8.has: documentation 8.has: module (update) This PR changes an existing module in `nixos/` labels Sep 18, 2022

KFearsoff force-pushed the grafana-rfc42 branch from 53d27dd to 0fa27c0 Compare September 18, 2022 09:56

KFearsoff mentioned this pull request Sep 18, 2022

Grafana: provision data in YAML #191464

Closed

ofborg bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 labels Sep 18, 2022

KFearsoff force-pushed the grafana-rfc42 branch from 0fa27c0 to 0caa969 Compare September 26, 2022 16:11

KFearsoff force-pushed the grafana-rfc42 branch 2 times, most recently from 717893c to b852126 Compare September 27, 2022 12:51

KFearsoff force-pushed the grafana-rfc42 branch from 08de85a to cf13ce9 Compare October 11, 2022 23:20

KFearsoff force-pushed the grafana-rfc42 branch from cf13ce9 to 2e057c6 Compare October 11, 2022 23:27

KFearsoff marked this pull request as ready for review October 11, 2022 23:27

KFearsoff requested review from yayayayaka, infinisil and winterqt October 11, 2022 23:27

KFearsoff force-pushed the grafana-rfc42 branch from 2e057c6 to 6629015 Compare October 11, 2022 23:39

mweinelt requested a review from Ma27 October 13, 2022 17:30

Ma27 reviewed Oct 14, 2022

View reviewed changes

nixos/modules/services/monitoring/grafana.nix Show resolved Hide resolved

KFearsoff force-pushed the grafana-rfc42 branch 3 times, most recently from ccb9e60 to a2a9a3e Compare October 15, 2022 17:50

KFearsoff requested a review from Ma27 October 15, 2022 17:55

Ma27 reviewed Oct 16, 2022

View reviewed changes

KFearsoff mentioned this pull request Oct 24, 2022

nixos/grafana: fix issues with rfc42 refactoring #197585

Merged

13 tasks

KFearsoff mentioned this pull request Oct 24, 2022

INI format doesn't support nested sections #197598

Open

SuperSandro2000 reviewed Oct 27, 2022

View reviewed changes

sternenseemann reviewed Oct 30, 2022

View reviewed changes

Ma27 mentioned this pull request Nov 2, 2022

nixos/grafana: documentation/warning improvements after #191768 #199150

Merged

13 tasks

ju1m reviewed Nov 3, 2022

View reviewed changes

nixos/modules/services/monitoring/grafana-image-renderer.nix Show resolved Hide resolved

Ma27 added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 20, 2022

Merge pull request #199150 from Ma27/grafana-fixup

853d0a3

nixos/grafana: documentation/warning improvements after #191768

herbetom mentioned this pull request Dec 26, 2022

grafana started to listen globally by default instead of only on localhost (22.05 -> 22.11) #207769

Closed

ncfavier mentioned this pull request Dec 27, 2022

either does not propagate suboptions #207962

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

nixos/grafana: refactor for RFC42 #191768

nixos/grafana: refactor for RFC42 #191768

KFearsoff commented Sep 18, 2022 •

edited

Loading

KFearsoff commented Sep 26, 2022 •

edited by Ma27

Loading

KFearsoff commented Oct 11, 2022 •

edited by Ma27

Loading

Ma27 commented Oct 14, 2022

Ma27 left a comment

pschyska commented Oct 24, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 24, 2022

SuperSandro2000 commented Oct 26, 2022 •

edited

Loading

SuperSandro2000 Oct 27, 2022

KFearsoff Oct 27, 2022

Ma27 Oct 28, 2022

KFearsoff Oct 28, 2022

ncfavier Dec 27, 2022

dhess commented Oct 29, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 29, 2022

sternenseemann Oct 30, 2022

sternenseemann Oct 30, 2022

sternenseemann commented Oct 30, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 30, 2022

sternenseemann commented Oct 30, 2022

Ma27 commented Oct 30, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 31, 2022

Ma27 commented Oct 31, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 31, 2022

Ma27 commented Oct 31, 2022

Ma27 commented Oct 31, 2022

Ma27 commented Nov 2, 2022

Ma27 commented Nov 2, 2022

KFearsoff commented Nov 2, 2022

ju1m commented Nov 4, 2022

KFearsoff commented Nov 4, 2022

		@@ -272,6 +272,12 @@ Available as [services.patroni](options.html#opt-services.patroni.enable).

		- The `services.matrix-synapse` systemd unit has been hardened.

		- The `services.grafana` options were converted to a [RFC 0042](https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/blob/master/rfcs/0042-config-option.md) configuration.

nixos/grafana: refactor for RFC42 #191768

nixos/grafana: refactor for RFC42 #191768

Conversation

KFearsoff commented Sep 18, 2022 • edited Loading

Description of changes

Things done

KFearsoff commented Sep 26, 2022 • edited by Ma27 Loading

KFearsoff commented Oct 11, 2022 • edited by Ma27 Loading

Ma27 commented Oct 14, 2022

Ma27 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

pschyska commented Oct 24, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 24, 2022

SuperSandro2000 commented Oct 26, 2022 • edited Loading

SuperSandro2000 Oct 27, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

KFearsoff Oct 27, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Ma27 Oct 28, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

KFearsoff Oct 28, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ncfavier Dec 27, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dhess commented Oct 29, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 29, 2022

sternenseemann Oct 30, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sternenseemann Oct 30, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sternenseemann commented Oct 30, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 30, 2022

sternenseemann commented Oct 30, 2022

Ma27 commented Oct 30, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 31, 2022

Ma27 commented Oct 31, 2022

KFearsoff commented Oct 31, 2022

Ma27 commented Oct 31, 2022

Ma27 commented Oct 31, 2022

Ma27 commented Nov 2, 2022

Ma27 commented Nov 2, 2022

KFearsoff commented Nov 2, 2022

ju1m commented Nov 4, 2022

KFearsoff commented Nov 4, 2022

KFearsoff commented Sep 18, 2022 •

edited

Loading

KFearsoff commented Sep 26, 2022 •

edited by Ma27

Loading

KFearsoff commented Oct 11, 2022 •

edited by Ma27

Loading

SuperSandro2000 commented Oct 26, 2022 •

edited

Loading