-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 993
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
Support Datadog HTTP API v2 #5469
Comments
This might be the first time we have an issue about adding support to v2. It might also be the case that using v2 will not solve your issue but Datadog support wants to move users to the v2 API. Based on the data you provided, I'm not sure I see an improvement, quite the opposite:
I don't see how this results in better transmission efficiency and stability. There is a batch size parameter in Micrometer you can play with: micrometer/micrometer-core/src/main/java/io/micrometer/core/instrument/push/PushRegistryConfig.java Lines 89 to 91 in 9917c67
If you are hitting a throughput rate limit, you can try to increase it (less but bigger requests), if you hit a payload size limit, try to decrease it (more but smaller requests). |
We received the following error while using:
So I talked to a datadog engineer about the related issues and he recommended using v2. We are currently sending directly to datadog via this library without statsD in spring project. Also, you can enter a uri in the spring resource option, but it seems to be processed as a url in the actual code, which is a bit confusing. |
So since this is a timeout, you can:
If the suggestions above don't help, I would talk to Datadog support instead of engineers. Again, there is no guarantee that moving to v2 will solve your issue but you can try this out on your own if you really want to by modifying the datadog registry.
I'm not sure I understand this. |
This timeout error does not occur once but occurs for several tens of minutes. I don't think this problem can be solved by increasing the timeout period. And when this error occurred, datadog said that there were no metrics received.
I think it should be host, not uri. This is because internally, only the host part is received and the path part is hard-coded. I think it would be a good idea to use v1 by default and allow users to choose the version. |
I think we would have to do it that way since metric name size is more restricted in the v2 API, according to what you shared. This means previously valid metric names will become invalid when switching to the v2 API and need to be truncated. That's going to break dashboards and metrics queries for users that have metrics that end up truncated. I've marked the issue as an enhancement request to support the v2 API. We'll have to check on any other changes, and as discussed above, we would need to retain support for v1 by default. A pull request would be welcome if someone wants to work on this. |
This seems like a backend or network error to me. Still not sure moving to v2 will fix it.
Maybe but I'm curious what makes you think that. Did you try?
If this is a network issue or an issue with an API Gateway/Load Balancer, this makes sense.
I see, I think uri is used instead of host because that way you can also specify the protocol (http vs. https):
|
However, while this problem occurred, there were no problems with our network and Datadog said there were no problems. |
Due to various issues when transmitting metrics, I contacted datadog and was told to upgrade the API version.
So, after checking to resolve the issue, I found that datadog-related APIs were hard-coded into the code.
code line
Are you planning to upgrade the API version? The recommended content is to transfer to /api/v2/series rather than /api/v1/series.
Related information will be attached below. Datadog says that transmission efficiency and stability have improved due to the upgrade.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: