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

metrics: move prometheusrules under metricServer #316

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

erikkn
Copy link
Contributor

@erikkn erikkn commented Sep 20, 2022

Hi, folks!

I don't mean to be pedantic, but the keda-operator-metrics-apiserver app is exposing these (https://keda.sh/docs/2.8/operate/prometheus/) metrics.
At the moment we create Prometheus rules under the prometheus.operator directive which is subsequently used in keda/templates/15-keda-prometheusrules.yaml. The name of the Prometheus rule is also {{ .Values.operator.name }}.

This all is a bit confusing to me and frankly, doesn't make sense, since it belongs to the metricServer section.

Would like to her you guys opinion on this :)

Checklist

  • [ x] Commits are signed with Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO - learn more)
  • A PR is opened to update KEDA core (repo) (if applicable, ie. when deployment manifests are modified)
  • [ x] README is updated with new configuration values (if applicable)

Fixes #

@erikkn erikkn requested a review from a team as a code owner September 20, 2022 13:19
@erikkn erikkn force-pushed the keda-metrics-prometheusrules branch 2 times, most recently from 21cd7cf to fe9d272 Compare September 20, 2022 13:22
@erikkn
Copy link
Contributor Author

erikkn commented Sep 21, 2022

@tomkerkhove decided to just tag you on this since you also reviewed my last PR. I would love to hear your opinion on this; thanks!

@@ -298,3 +286,15 @@ prometheus:
# expr: sum by ( scaledObject , scaler) (rate(keda_metrics_adapter_scaler_errors[2m])) > 0
# for: 2m
# labels:
operator:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Dont think you wanted to use operator?

Copy link
Member

@tomkerkhove tomkerkhove left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The problem here is taht this change will break a lot of end-users. We'll need to be backwards compatible here (even if it's confusing).

Side question - @zroubalik Are we planning on exposing Prometheus metrics on the operator?

@erikkn
Copy link
Contributor Author

erikkn commented Sep 22, 2022

I do recognize that this is a breaking change, you want to support both for now?

@tomkerkhove
Copy link
Member

I think it's best to do, yes

@tomkerkhove
Copy link
Member

We actually already have metrics on the operator so we should make sure both are still accessible in a backwards compatible way - kedacore/keda#3586

So instead of removing the operator pieces, I'd just keep them in addition to your new additions.

@JorTurFer as FYI

@v-shenoy
Copy link
Contributor

v-shenoy commented Sep 27, 2022

I think having metrics on both pods is the way, as it makes sense to record certain metrics on particular pods. So, adding configuration for metric server while keeping the operator would be great.

@tomkerkhove
Copy link
Member

What is the status on this PR? This might be a bit outdated due to our recent Prometheus changes

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants