Those details in the pr. We dont need that resolution in here.
+1
El mar, 23 abr 2024, 13:02, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <
[email protected]> escribió:
> Yes, I was thinking something like that.
> In the parser, add a metadata key ("Metric"?) to the node you want to
> record duration for.
> In the monitoring addon, check for that metadata key and if there, add the
> duration of that node to the metric.
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 12:54 PM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I would say is not bad idea but I would restrict per node. Usually you
> dont
> > want to store information about a script or a transformation.... Maybe a
> > rest call or a service to keep taps on them. I would something like.
> >
> > Metadata on the node for signaling you want to meassure time
> > Metrics per process id - node maybe min, max, average ?
> >
> > Wdyt ?
> >
> >
> > El mar, 23 abr 2024, 11:17, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <
> > [email protected]> escribió:
> >
> > > Hi Enrique, I was wondering if we should go further (using a different
> > > issue) and add an additional DistributionSummary "
> > > kogito_node_instance_duration_seconds" to track node execution
> duration,
> > > similar to already existing "kogito_process_instance_duration_seconds"
> > and
> > > "kogito_work_item_duration_seconds", wdyt?
> > > I think such a summary should only be enabled explicitly through
> > > configuration, because the number of records is potentially too high.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 4:47 PM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The proposal is sensible as it will fit more what the user has in the
> > > > data index/audit... so we won't have problems regarding data that
> does
> > > > not fit among sources.
> > > > +1 to me.
> > > >
> > > > One of the things that we should be aware of is related to
> > > > clustering... one process can start in one node.... and can be
> > > > completed in other. This should be kept in mind.
> > > >
> > > > El lun, 22 abr 2024 a las 14:56, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti
> > > > (<[email protected]>) escribió:
> > > > >
> > > > > While implementing the proposal, I faced an issue that forced me to
> > > amend
> > > > > it https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1101 to
> > keep
> > > it
> > > > > aligned with the existing monitoring collection approach.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 9:53 AM Fabrizio Antonangeli <
> > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 8:46 PM ricardo zanini fernandes <
> > > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 2:56 PM Pere Fernandez <
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > El dv., 19 d’abr. 2024, 18:06, Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti
> <
> > > > > > > > [email protected]> va escriure:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > > > Let me know if there is any problem with the proposal in
> this
> > > > issue
> > > > > > > > > <
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1101>
> > > > > > > > description.
> > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
