Fix retrieving probe logs by target name when probed by multiple modules #1257
+38
−12
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
EconomicTouristsArmLate
force-pushed
the
feat-logs-add-module-filter
branch
7 times, most recently
from
dabf913 to
4f0f1f6
Compare
EconomicTouristsArmLate
force-pushed
the
feat-logs-add-module-filter
branch
from
4f0f1f6 to
b9628bc
Compare
|
rebased onto latest |
EconomicTouristsArmLate
changed the title
/logs?module= filter parameter
EconomicTouristsArmLate
force-pushed
the
feat-logs-add-module-filter
branch
from
b9628bc to
a16959b
Compare
This allows to uniquely identify a probe by target and module. Previously with the `?target=` selector only, it was impossible to select the correct probe log, when multiple modules had probed a target. Signed-off-by: Norwin Roosen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Norwin Roosen <[email protected]>
EconomicTouristsArmLate
force-pushed
the
feat-logs-add-module-filter
branch
from
a16959b to
7b6bc9e
Compare
|
not stale, just waiting for review... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
few nits and a comment, rest lgtm.
can you also update the PR description as per the new PR template: https://github.com/prometheus/blackbox_exporter/blob/master/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
| if resultFalse.Target != "target-1" { | ||
| t.Errorf("Error finding the result in history by target for target: expected \"%s\" and got \"%s\"", "target-1", resultFalse.Target) | ||
| } | ||
| if resultFalse.ModuleName != "module-1" { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we also have "module-0", "target-1" entry, so shouldn't we check for both?
|
|
||
| // Get returns a given result by url. | ||
| func (rh *ResultHistory) GetByTarget(target string) *Result { | ||
| // GetByTarget returns a given result by url, optionally filtered by a module name. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: maybe we should rename the method to show that module is also supported.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Followup to #1063, which landed in 0.25.0:
When fetching logs of probes, this added URL query parameter allows to uniquely identify a probe log by target and module.
Previously with the
?target=selector only (added in #1063), it was impossible to select the correct probe log, when multiple modules had probed a target.In other words - this addition is a requirement, for reliably linking to the latest log of a probe with a given module (for example from dashboards).