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

[metricbeat] Docker module meets metricbeat #2444

Closed
wants to merge 14 commits into from

Conversation

douaejeouit
Copy link
Contributor

Docker module wants to join you 🎉 !
Comming soon : Unit & integration tests for the rest of metricsets
@ruflin

@elasticsearch-release
Copy link

Jenkins standing by to test this. If you aren't a maintainer, you can ignore this comment. Someone with commit access, please review this and clear it for Jenkins to run.

1 similar comment
@elasticsearch-release
Copy link

Jenkins standing by to test this. If you aren't a maintainer, you can ignore this comment. Someone with commit access, please review this and clear it for Jenkins to run.

@douaejeouit douaejeouit closed this Sep 2, 2016
@douaejeouit douaejeouit reopened this Sep 2, 2016
@@ -94,39 +94,39 @@ metricbeat.modules:

The following metricsets are available:

* <<metricbeat-metricset-system-core,core>>
* <<metricbeat-metricset-system-diskio,diskio>>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure why these changes show up here as this should not have changed. I assume it is based on an old version of master.

@ruflin
Copy link
Contributor

ruflin commented Sep 6, 2016

To prevent future conflicts with master and review of large changes I suggest the following steps:

  • Remove all parts from this PR which were accidentially added during merging like some config files
  • Mark all metricsets experimental
  • Check in source from docker client (not yet in the PR)
  • Rebase on master / merge master

Then we can merge the PR as it is. There is still more work needed like some fields cleanup or adding tests. But that can be done in a second step and will make it much easier to review the PR's. Let me know in case someone has some objections?

@douaejeouit Could you take care of the 4 steps above?

@douaejeouit
Copy link
Contributor Author

douaejeouit commented Sep 8, 2016

@ruflin , Glad to read that!
Concerning the tests, it's not fnished yet. I began with CPU & Memory metrisets and i'll , for sure, add tests for the rest of metricsets.
Ok for the 4 steps. i'll be on it very soon 👍

@douaejeouit
Copy link
Contributor Author

poke @ruflin

@ruflin
Copy link
Contributor

ruflin commented Sep 14, 2016

@douaejeouit It seems like the docker client has some more dependencies which are not checked in yet. That is the reason that the travis build fails.

@douaejeouit douaejeouit force-pushed the docker branch 3 times, most recently from 4c53815 to 059014d Compare September 21, 2016 09:01
@douaejeouit
Copy link
Contributor Author

Here we are .. @ruflin

@ruflin
Copy link
Contributor

ruflin commented Sep 21, 2016

jenkins, test it

@ruflin
Copy link
Contributor

ruflin commented Sep 21, 2016

@douaejeouit I didn't check the PR in detail yet just had a look at the files change and it seems there are still quite a few files modified which shouldn't be modified by this PR. For example related to postgresql and others. This could come from merging in an older version of master or similar. Can you rebase your changes again on top of master and then run make collect? Please verify that no changes are in that should not be there. Because from my perspective I'm ok to merge in the docker module if it is not perfect yet, but it can't affect / change existing modules.

@douaejeouit
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ruflin Ok. i'll do the needful

@douaejeouit douaejeouit changed the title Docker module meets metricbeat [metricbeat] Docker module meets metricbeat Sep 22, 2016
@ruflin
Copy link
Contributor

ruflin commented Sep 22, 2016

@douaejeouit I took your branch here and run the suggested commands on top. See the outcome here: #2619 Not sure if some of the commands on your side are not running successfully? Or did you not add them to git to be commited?

@douaejeouit douaejeouit mentioned this pull request Sep 22, 2016
previous commits
ok docker
add docker module
add container metricset & socket field for all the metrcsets
add container metricset
testing err != nil
update container's metricset
update docker.go
update feilds
TODO : add more fields
add the first test unitaire : CPU metricset
add other cpu calcul methods tests
add mock for CPU
add test  for cpu metricset generator
update tests for cpu metricset
update test GetCpuStats
add first integration test for cpu metricset
complete the cpu fields
complete the cpu fields
update the cpu fields
imports internal convention : checked.
add basic integration test for the cpu metricset
update code so that dockerClient instance is created only once for all the metricsets.
update code so that dockerClient instance is created only once for all the metricsets & some log info text
update vendors
add unit tests for memory metricset
mark all metricsets experimental
-Merge on master .2
update vendors
update vendors : remove submodule
update data fields for tests
ruflin pushed a commit to ruflin/beats that referenced this pull request Sep 23, 2016
All credit for this module goes to @douaejeouit and Ingensi. See elastic#2444
tsg pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 23, 2016
All credit for this module goes to @douaejeouit and Ingensi. See #2444
@ruflin
Copy link
Contributor

ruflin commented Sep 23, 2016

@douaejeouit Thanks a lot for all your work on this one. We merge #2625 into master and I opened a meta issue to track the open issue / enhancements that should be made: #2629 I hope now all our future PR's will be a little bit smaller :-) Closing this one.

@ruflin ruflin closed this Sep 23, 2016
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