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
[stats] Do not expose meaningless stats for publisher #11454
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
@massakam Thanks for your contribution. For this PR, do we need to update docs? (The PR template contains info about doc, which helps others know more about the changes. Can you provide doc-related info in this and future PR descriptions? Thanks) |
@Anonymitaet Removed these fields from the json example in the documentation: 637b7aa |
Currently, publisher stats includes some fields that are meaningless for users. ``` count producerNameOffset producerNameLength addressOffset addressLength connectedSinceOffset connectedSinceLength clientVersionOffset clientVersionLength stringBuffer ``` These cause the size of the json data to grow and should not be exposed. Add the `@JsonIgnore` annotation to the above fields. This is a modification similar to #11005. (cherry picked from commit d3c44ba)
### Motivation Currently, publisher stats includes some fields that are meaningless for users. ``` count producerNameOffset producerNameLength addressOffset addressLength connectedSinceOffset connectedSinceLength clientVersionOffset clientVersionLength stringBuffer ``` These cause the size of the json data to grow and should not be exposed. ### Modifications Add the `@JsonIgnore` annotation to the above fields. This is a modification similar to apache#11005.
Motivation
Currently, publisher stats includes some fields that are meaningless for users.
These cause the size of the json data to grow and should not be exposed.
Modifications
Add the
@JsonIgnore
annotation to the above fields. This is a modification similar to #11005.