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

[8.x] TBS: make storage_limit follow processor lifecycle; update TBS processor config (backport #15488) #15490

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

mergify[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify mergify bot commented Jan 30, 2025

Motivation/summary

Fix a regression from #15235 where storage_limit does not follow processor lifecycle.
Remove storage limit from processor config.
Add storage to processor config validation.

Checklist

- [ ] Update CHANGELOG.asciidoc Fixing a regression from an unreleased change

  • Documentation has been updated

For functional changes, consider:

  • Is it observable through the addition of either logging or metrics?
  • Is its use being published in telemetry to enable product improvement?
  • Have system tests been added to avoid regression?

How to test these changes

Should be tested along #15235 . Ensure that EA hot reload applies the new storage limit by changing the integration policy.

Related issues


This is an automatic backport of pull request #15488 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com).

…sor config (#15488)

Fix a regression from #15235 where storage_limit does not follow processor lifecycle.
Remove storage limit from processor config.
Add storage to processor config validation.

(cherry picked from commit dcb08ac)

# Conflicts:
#	x-pack/apm-server/main.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/config.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/config_test.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/rw.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/rw_test.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/storage_bench_test.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/storage_manager.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/storage_manager_bench_test.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/storage_manager_test.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/processor.go
#	x-pack/apm-server/sampling/processor_test.go
@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team as a code owner January 30, 2025 20:00
@mergify mergify bot added backport conflicts There is a conflict in the backported pull request labels Jan 30, 2025
Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Jan 30, 2025

Cherry-pick of dcb08ac has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/8.x/pr-15488
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/8.x'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit dcb08ac9.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add/rm <file>..." as appropriate to mark resolution)
	both modified:   x-pack/apm-server/main.go
	both modified:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/config.go
	both modified:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/config_test.go
	deleted by us:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/rw.go
	deleted by us:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/rw_test.go
	both modified:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/storage_bench_test.go
	both modified:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/storage_manager.go
	deleted by us:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/storage_manager_bench_test.go
	both modified:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/eventstorage/storage_manager_test.go
	both modified:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/processor.go
	both modified:   x-pack/apm-server/sampling/processor_test.go

no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally

Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Feb 3, 2025

This pull request has not been merged yet. Could you please review and merge it @carsonip? 🙏

@carsonip
Copy link
Member

carsonip commented Feb 5, 2025

Closing the PR as we do not intend to bring this back to 8.x due to migration implications.

@carsonip carsonip closed this Feb 5, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport conflicts There is a conflict in the backported pull request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant