-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 465
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
coord: Make storage usage interval configurable #14787
Conversation
This commit makes the storage usage collection interval configurable, so that it is easier to test. Works towards resolving MaterializeInc#3739
974a109
to
c5c1cf6
Compare
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.
LGTM modulo nit about command line argument naming.
env = "STORAGE_USAGE_COLLECTION_INTERVAL_SEC", | ||
default_value = "3600" | ||
)] | ||
storage_usage_collection_interval_sec: u64, |
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.
Can you make this a storage_usage_collection_interval: Duration
directly and tell clap to parse it using the parse_duration
crate?
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.
We have our own parse_duration
function which I think we've used in the past to parse command line arguments. Should we use that instead? Or does the crate do a better job?
@benesch The
The crate also uses an old version of the This causes us to have duplicate dependencies on the Lines 3 to 8 in 0357d26
Considering that the crate is dead, do we want to fork it or go a different route? |
This commit makes the storage usage collection interval configurable, so that it is easier to test.
Works towards resolving #3739
Motivation
This PR adds a known-desirable feature.
Checklist
This PR has adequate test coverage / QA involvement has been duly considered.
This PR evolves an existing
$T ⇔ Proto$T
mapping (possibly in a backwards-incompatible way) and therefore is tagged with aT-protobuf
label.This PR includes the following user-facing behavior changes: