The idea behind it is described in detail in
https://github.com/prometheus/client_golang/issues/320 .
This commit also updates the example given in
promhttp/instrument_server_test.go , which nicely illustrates the
benefit of this change.
So far, currying could be emulated by creating different metric vec's
with different values in their ConstLabels. This was quite difficult
to grasp - which is essentially what was done in the example mentioned
above. Now that this use case can be solved without ConstLabels, we
can safely declare ConstLabels as rarely used. (Perhaps we can
deprecate them entirely one day, but I'll take a raincheck on that
when the changes of v0.10 have materialized.) This commit thus also
updates the ConstLabel doc comments in the various Opts. (It contained
fairly outdated stuff anyway.)
This also updates all tests and examples to use explicitly set
objectives.
In v0.10, DefObjectives will be completely removed, and the default
Summary will have no objectives then.
Fixes#118
That's the "soft" part of the deprecation: Everything that has been
marked deprecated in v0.8 or earlier and is straight-forward to
replace by a non-deprecated way, is removed here.
Sadly, this does not include the HTTP part. We first need to provide a
replacement for HTTP instrumentation (as planned for v0.8) to then
remove the deprecated parts in v0.9.
The new vendoring was produced by running:
godep save -r ./examples/... ./prometheus/... ./text/... ./model/... ./extraction/...
Two things to note:
- "extraction/processor0_0_{1,2}_test.go" imported a package from
"github.com/prometheus/prometheus", all for just one tiny testing
function. To not have to deal with a circular vendoring dependency, I
simply replaced the usage of the function by some in-line logic.
- godep grouped the rewritten imports slightly differently for some
reason, but at least the standard library imports are still in a
separate section. Not sure if it's worth manually keeping our old
import grouping scheme or if we should simply use that godep-generated
one.
Summaries as implemented cannot be aggregated in a meaningful
way. Partitoning them by status code and method only made sense if we
were interested in the individual latency and size of e.g. GET request
that result in status 503. In general, that's not the case. Most of
the time, the user will be interested in the latency and size of _all_
HTTP requests.
(With future changes to client_golang, we will consider making the
HTTP instrumentation configurable, e.g. to handle the case where the
user is only interested in the latency of successful requests.)
Also, remove quotes from the Content-type header. It's not illegal to
have quotes there, but they are not needed, and at other places, we
are not using them. So fewer characters and more consistency.
Change-Id: If7a78bde85154163e4426daec493d973213e83e9
This rewrite had may backs and forths. In my git repository, it
consists of 35 commits which I cannot group or merge into reasonable
review buckets. Gerrit breaks fundamental git semantics, so I have to
squash the 35 commits into one for the review.
I'll push this not with refs/for/master, but with refs/for/next so
that we can transition after submission in a controlled fashion.
For the review, I recommend to start with looking at godoc and in
particular the many examples. After that, continue with a line-by-line
detailed review. (The big picture is hopefully as expected after
wrapping up the discussion earlier.)
Change-Id: Ib38cc46493a5139ca29d84020650929d94cac850
beorn7