prometheus

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Bryan Boreham	a073e04a9b	Merge pull request #12366 from prometheus/release-2.44 Merge release 2.44 back to main	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	7a48a266b6	labels: respect Set after Del in Builder (#12322 ) * labels: respect Set after Del in Builder The implementations are not symmetric between `Set()` and `Del()`, so we must be careful. Add tests for this, both in labels and in relabel where the issue was reported. Also make the slice implementation consistent re `slices.Contains`. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
cui fliter	276ca6a883	fix some comments Signed-off-by: cui fliter <imcusg@gmail.com>	2 years ago
beorn7	5b53aa1108	style: Replace `else if` cascades with `switch` Wiser coders than myself have come to the conclusion that a `switch` statement is almost always superior to a statement that includes any `else if`. The exceptions that I have found in our codebase are just these two: * The `if else` is followed by an additional statement before the next condition (separated by a `;`). * The whole thing is within a `for` loop and `break` statements are used. In this case, using `switch` would require tagging the `for` loop, which probably tips the balance. Why are `switch` statements more readable? For one, fewer curly braces. But more importantly, the conditions all have the same alignment, so the whole thing follows the natural flow of going down a list of conditions. With `else if`, in contrast, all conditions but the first are "hidden" behind `} else if `, harder to spot and (for no good reason) presented differently from the first condition. I'm sure the aforemention wise coders can list even more reasons. In any case, I like it so much that I have found myself recommending it in code reviews. I would like to make it a habit in our code base, without making it a hard requirement that we would test on the CI. But for that, there has to be a role model, so this commit eliminates all `if else` occurrences, unless it is autogenerated code or fits one of the exceptions above. Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	10cc60af01	labels: add ScratchBuilder.Overwrite for slice implementation This is a method used by some downstream projects; it was created to optimize the implementation in `labels_string.go` but we should have one for both implementations so the same code works with either. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Ganesh Vernekar	5588cab8b2	Merge pull request #12173 from bboreham/builder-no-empty-labels labels: simplify call to get Labels from Builder	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	e917202766	labels: make sure estimated size is not negative Deleted labels are remembered, even if they were not in `base` or were removed from `add`, so `base+add-del` could go negative. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	ee1157c14a	labels: shrink stack arrays in Builder.Range Go spends some time initializing all the elements of these arrays to zero, so reduce the size from 1024 to 128. This is still much bigger than we ever expect for a set of labels. (If someone does have more than 128 labels it will still work, but via heap allocation.) Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	b987afa7ef	labels: simplify call to get Labels from Builder It took a `Labels` where the memory could be re-used, but in practice this hardly ever benefitted. Especially after converting `relabel.Process` to `relabel.ProcessBuilder`. Comparing the parameter to `nil` was a bug; `EmptyLabels` is not `nil` so the slice was reallocated multiple times by `append`. Lastly `Builder.Labels()` now estimates that the final size will depend on labels added and deleted. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	3743d87c56	labels: cope with mutating Builder during Range call Although we had a different slice, the underlying memory was the same so any changes meant we could skip some values. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	d740abf0c6	model/labels: add Get and Range to Builder This lets relabelling work on a `Builder` rather than converting to and from `Labels` on every rule. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	38c6d3da9f	labels: use slices.Sort for better performance The difference is modest, but we've used `slices.Sort` in lots of other places so why not here. name old time/op new time/op delta Builder 1.04µs ± 3% 0.95µs ± 3% -8.27% (p=0.008 n=5+5) name old alloc/op new alloc/op delta Builder 312B ± 0% 288B ± 0% -7.69% (p=0.008 n=5+5) name old allocs/op new allocs/op delta Builder 2.00 ± 0% 1.00 ± 0% -50.00% (p=0.008 n=5+5) Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	6136ae67e0	labels: shrink by making internals a single string This commit adds an alternate implementation for `labels.Labels`, behind a build tag `stringlabels`. Instead of storing label names and values as individual strings, they are all concatenated into one string in this format: [len][name0][len][value0][len][name1][len][value1]... The lengths are varint encoded so usually a single byte. The previous `[]string` had 24 bytes of overhead for the slice and 16 for each label name and value; this one has 16 bytes overhead plus 1 for each name and value. In `ScratchBuilder.Overwrite` and `Labels.Hash` we use an unsafe conversion from string to byte slice. `Overwrite` is explicitly unsafe, but for `Hash` this is a pure performance hack. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	10b27dfb84	Simplify IndexReader.Series interface Instead of passing in a `ScratchBuilder` and `Labels`, just pass the builder and the caller can extract labels from it. In many cases the caller didn't use the Labels value anyway. Now in `Labels.ScratchBuilder` we need a slightly different API: one to assign what will be the result, instead of overwriting some other `Labels`. This is safer and easier to reason about. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	2b8b8d9ac7	labels: new methods to work without access to internals Without changing the definition of `labels.Labels`, add methods which enable code using it to work without knowledge of the internals. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	ea7345a09c	labels: improve comment on Builder.Set Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	a19b369f9e	labels: avoid lint warning on New() This code is a bit cleaner. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Julien Pivotto	bb323db613	Merge pull request #11074 from damnever/fix/datamodelvalidation Validate the metric name and label names	2 years ago
Xiaochao Dong (@damnever)	9979024a30	Report error if the series contains invalid metric names or labels during scrape Signed-off-by: Xiaochao Dong (@damnever) <the.xcdong@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	8d4140a06e	labels: note that Hash may change For performance reasons we may use a different implementation of Hash() in future, so note this so callers can be warned. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	5421c778ba	labels: in tests use labels.FromStrings Replacing code which assumes the internal structure of `Labels`. Add a convenience function `EmptyLabels()` which is more efficient than calling `New()`. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	8b863c42dd	Optimise relabeling by re-using memory (#11147 ) * model/relabel: Add benchmark Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com> * model/relabel: re-use Builder across relabels Saves memory allocations. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com> * labels.Builder: allow re-use of result slice This reduces memory allocations where the caller has a suitable slice available. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com> * model/relabel: re-use source values slice To reduce memory allocations. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com> * Unwind one change causing test failures Restore original behaviour in PopulateLabels, where we must not overwrite the input set. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com> * relabel: simplify values optimisation Use a stack-based array for up to 16 source labels, which will be the vast majority of cases. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com> * lint Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Bryan Boreham	2e2c014d52	Labels: optimise creation of signature with/without labels (#10667 ) * Labels: create signature with/without labels Instead of creating a new Labels slice then converting to signature, go directly to the signature and save time. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com> * Labels: refactor Builder tests Have one test with a range of cases, and have them check the final output rather than checking the internal structure of the Builder. Also add a couple of cases where the value is "", which should be interpreted as 'delete'. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com> * Labels: add 'Keep' function to Builder This lets us replace `Labels.WithLabels` with the more general `Builder`. In `engine.resultMetric()` we can call `Keep()` instead of checking and calling `Del()`. Avoid calling `Sort()` in `Builder.Labels()` if we didn't add anything, so that `Keep()` has the same performance as `WithLabels()`. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>	3 years ago
Łukasz Mierzwa	b11062bfcc	Don't count added labels when initializing slice (#10756 ) This was added in #10749 but based on feedback it might be over-allocating so worth removing. Signed-off-by: Łukasz Mierzwa <l.mierzwa@gmail.com>	3 years ago
Łukasz Mierzwa	08262454a3	Preallocate Labels in labels.Builder (#10749 ) This tries to avoid re-allocations of labels slice since we know possible max size Signed-off-by: Łukasz Mierzwa <l.mierzwa@gmail.com>	3 years ago
Łukasz Mierzwa	89de30a0b7	Avoid reallocating map in MatchLabels (#10715 ) We know the max size of our map so we can create it with that information and avoid extra allocations Signed-off-by: Łukasz Mierzwa <l.mierzwa@gmail.com>	3 years ago
Nick Pillitteri	53ac9d6d66	Compare equality of label.Label structs directly (#10427 ) * labels.Equal benchmark for equal, not equal, and differing lengths Signed-off-by: Nick Pillitteri <nick.pillitteri@grafana.com> * Compare equality of label.Label structs directly Compare the structs using `==` instead of the name and value of each label. This is functionally equivalent and about ~10% faster in my testing. Signed-off-by: Nick Pillitteri <nick.pillitteri@grafana.com> * Use longer more realistic names and values in benchmark Signed-off-by: Nick Pillitteri <nick.pillitteri@grafana.com>	3 years ago
beorn7	c954cd9d1d	Move packages out of deprecated pkg directory This creates a new `model` directory and moves all data-model related packages over there: exemplar labels relabel rulefmt textparse timestamp value All the others are more or less utilities and have been moved to `util`: gate logging modetimevfs pool runtime Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>	3 years ago

28 Commits (394da05dd407f07b592b097ee6a7b4a54d9d9967)