[PRW-2.0] New config surface allowing content-type and encoding preferences for both sending and receiving. #13968
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
GitHub Actions
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,162 @@ | ||
| package config | ||
|
|
||
| import ( | ||
| "errors" | ||
| "fmt" | ||
| "sort" | ||
| "strings" | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO(bwplotka): Consider an util for "preference enums" as it's similar code for rw compression, proto type and scrape protocol. | ||
|
|
||
| // RemoteWriteProtoType represents the supported protobuf types for the remote write. | ||
| type RemoteWriteProtoType string | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. ProtoType feels awkward, can we call it There was a problem hiding this comment. I tried ProtoMessages, ProtoVersion etc but they might be worse options. ProtoVersion feels like Protocol Version, so spec version? But it represent protobuf type, to in short prototype, not protocol version and I want to make it explicit. Or do you think ProtoVersion would not mislead? Perhaps There was a problem hiding this comment.
|
||
|
|
||
| // Validate returns error if the given protobuf type is not supported. | ||
| func (s RemoteWriteProtoType) Validate() error { | ||
| if _, ok := RemoteWriteContentTypeHeaders[s]; !ok { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("unknown remote write protobuf type %v, supported: %v", | ||
| s, func() (ret []string) { | ||
| for k := range RemoteWriteContentTypeHeaders { | ||
| ret = append(ret, string(k)) | ||
| } | ||
| sort.Strings(ret) | ||
| return ret | ||
| }()) | ||
| } | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type RemoteWriteProtoTypes []RemoteWriteProtoType | ||
|
|
||
| func (t RemoteWriteProtoTypes) Strings() []string { | ||
| ret := make([]string, 0, len(t)) | ||
| for _, typ := range t { | ||
| ret = append(ret, string(typ)) | ||
| } | ||
| return ret | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (t RemoteWriteProtoTypes) String() string { | ||
| return strings.Join(t.Strings(), ",") | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // ServerAcceptHeaderValue returns server Accept header value for | ||
| // given list of proto types as per RFC 9110 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html#section-12.5.1-14 | ||
| func (t RemoteWriteProtoTypes) ServerAcceptHeaderValue() string { | ||
| // TODO(bwplotka): Consider implementing an optional quality factor. | ||
| ret := make([]string, 0, len(t)) | ||
| for _, typ := range t { | ||
| ret = append(ret, RemoteWriteContentTypeHeaders[typ]) | ||
| } | ||
| return strings.Join(ret, ",") | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| var ( | ||
| RemoteWriteProtoTypeV1 RemoteWriteProtoType = "v1.WriteRequest" | ||
| RemoteWriteProtoTypeV2 RemoteWriteProtoType = "v2.WriteRequest" | ||
| RemoteWriteContentTypeHeaders = map[RemoteWriteProtoType]string{ | ||
| RemoteWriteProtoTypeV1: "application/x-protobuf", // Also application/x-protobuf; proto=prometheus.WriteRequest but simplified for compatibility with 1.x spec. | ||
| RemoteWriteProtoTypeV2: "application/x-protobuf;proto=io.prometheus.remote.write.v2.WriteRequest", | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // DefaultRemoteWriteProtoTypes is the set of remote write protobuf types that will be | ||
| // preferred by the remote write client. | ||
| DefaultRemoteWriteProtoTypes = RemoteWriteProtoTypes{ | ||
| RemoteWriteProtoTypeV1, | ||
| RemoteWriteProtoTypeV2, | ||
| } | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| // validateRemoteWriteProtoTypes return errors if we see problems with rw protobuf types in | ||
| // the Prometheus configuration. | ||
| func validateRemoteWriteProtoTypes(ts []RemoteWriteProtoType) error { | ||
| if len(ts) == 0 { | ||
| return errors.New("protobuf_types cannot be empty") | ||
| } | ||
| dups := map[string]struct{}{} | ||
| for _, t := range ts { | ||
| if _, ok := dups[strings.ToLower(string(t))]; ok { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("duplicated protobuf types in protobuf_types, got %v", ts) | ||
| } | ||
| if err := t.Validate(); err != nil { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("protobuf_types: %w", err) | ||
| } | ||
| dups[strings.ToLower(string(t))] = struct{}{} | ||
| } | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // RemoteWriteCompression represents the supported compressions for the remote write. | ||
| type RemoteWriteCompression string | ||
|
|
||
| // Validate returns error if the given protobuf type is not supported. | ||
| func (s RemoteWriteCompression) Validate() error { | ||
| if _, ok := RemoteWriteContentEncodingHeaders[s]; !ok { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("unknown remote write protobuf type %v, supported: %v", | ||
| s, func() (ret []string) { | ||
| for k := range RemoteWriteContentEncodingHeaders { | ||
| ret = append(ret, string(k)) | ||
| } | ||
| sort.Strings(ret) | ||
| return ret | ||
| }()) | ||
| } | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type RemoteWriteCompressions []RemoteWriteCompression | ||
|
|
||
| func (cs RemoteWriteCompressions) Strings() []string { | ||
| ret := make([]string, 0, len(cs)) | ||
| for _, c := range cs { | ||
| ret = append(ret, string(c)) | ||
| } | ||
| return ret | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (cs RemoteWriteCompressions) String() string { | ||
| return strings.Join(cs.Strings(), ",") | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // ServerAcceptEncodingHeaderValue returns server Accept-Encoding header value for | ||
| // given list of compressions as per RFC 9110 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html#name-accept-encoding | ||
| func (cs RemoteWriteCompressions) ServerAcceptEncodingHeaderValue() string { | ||
| // TODO(bwplotka): Consider implementing an optional quality factor. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. by not doing so yet we're just interpreting the order as the preference ordering, right? There was a problem hiding this comment. Yes, which is part of RFC 9110 spec, q is optional and allow to tell "weight" of the ordering. |
||
| ret := make([]string, 0, len(cs)) | ||
| for _, typ := range cs { | ||
| ret = append(ret, RemoteWriteContentEncodingHeaders[typ]) | ||
| } | ||
| return strings.Join(ret, ",") | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // validateRemoteWriteCompressions return errors if we see problems with rw compressions in | ||
| // the Prometheus configuration. | ||
| func validateRemoteWriteCompressions(cs []RemoteWriteCompression) error { | ||
| if len(cs) == 0 { | ||
| return errors.New("compressions cannot be empty") | ||
| } | ||
| dups := map[string]struct{}{} | ||
| for _, c := range cs { | ||
| if _, ok := dups[strings.ToLower(string(c))]; ok { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("duplicated compression in compressions, got %v", cs) | ||
| } | ||
| if err := c.Validate(); err != nil { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("compressions: %w", err) | ||
| } | ||
| dups[strings.ToLower(string(c))] = struct{}{} | ||
| } | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| var ( | ||
| RemoteWriteCompressionSnappy RemoteWriteCompression = "snappy" | ||
|
|
||
| RemoteWriteContentEncodingHeaders = map[RemoteWriteCompression]string{ | ||
| RemoteWriteCompressionSnappy: "snappy", | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| DefaultRemoteWriteCompressions = RemoteWriteCompressions{ | ||
| RemoteWriteCompressionSnappy, | ||
| } | ||
| ) | ||
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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.
I wonder if we can make a case for moving all of this, including the flag to enable the receiver, to the config file
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.
Nice, totally possible. But it's hard to do in our feature - it's too many changes.
Perhaps NOT exposing any flags for now and adding TODO + issue would be fine for now?