filebeat/input/{tcp,udp}: collect rx and drops metrics for unspecified addresses #35111
Conversation
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
efd6
added
bug
Filebeat
botelastic
bot
added
needs_team
…d addresses Previously we were accepting exact (case-folded) address matches only, resulting in loss of receive queue and drops metrics when the inputs were listening on 0.0.0.0. This change fixes that by collecting these values from all /proc lines that have a matching port when the address is unspecified.
efd6
force-pushed
the
filebeat-unspecified-addrs-metrics
branch
from
3bfaaf9 to
95f6656
Compare
|
Pinging @elastic/security-external-integrations (Team:Security-External Integrations) |
💚 Build Succeeded
Expand to view the summary
Build stats
Test stats 🧪
💚 Flaky test reportTests succeeded. 🤖 GitHub commentsExpand to view the GitHub comments
To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:
|
P1llus
approved these changes
Apr 18, 2023
leehinman
approved these changes
Apr 18, 2023
|
@leehinman No, it's all v4. We don't handle metrics for v6. This is something that we will probably need to add. The code that's here is readily generalisable for that reason. |
|
@leehinman We will be adding support for v6 in a follow-up. |
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 18, 2023
…d addresses (#35111) Previously we were accepting exact (case-folded) address matches only, resulting in loss of receive queue and drops metrics when the inputs were listening on 0.0.0.0. This change fixes that by collecting these values from all /proc lines that have a matching port when the address is unspecified. (cherry picked from commit 097bd76)
efd6
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 19, 2023
…d addresses (#35111) (#35121) Previously we were accepting exact (case-folded) address matches only, resulting in loss of receive queue and drops metrics when the inputs were listening on 0.0.0.0. This change fixes that by collecting these values from all /proc lines that have a matching port when the address is unspecified. (cherry picked from commit 097bd76) Co-authored-by: Dan Kortschak <90160302+efd6@users.noreply.github.com>
7 tasks
chrisberkhout
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 1, 2023
…d addresses (#35111) Previously we were accepting exact (case-folded) address matches only, resulting in loss of receive queue and drops metrics when the inputs were listening on 0.0.0.0. This change fixes that by collecting these values from all /proc lines that have a matching port when the address is unspecified.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
What does this PR do?
Previously we were accepting exact (case-folded) address matches only, resulting in loss of receive queue and drops metrics when the inputs were listening on 0.0.0.0. This change fixes that by collecting these values from all /proc lines that have a matching port when the address is unspecified.
Why is it important?
Patches an observability hole.
Checklist
CHANGELOG.next.asciidocorCHANGELOG-developer.next.asciidoc.Author's Checklist
How to test this PR locally
Related issues
Use cases
Screenshots
Logs