feat: add count of merge buffers per groupby query metrics
Fixes #17944.
Description
Add mergeBuffer/usedCount metric per query for the used merge buffers. This metric is different from mergeBuffer/used because that one is a point-in-time metric, and this one is for each query. It's also different from mergeBuffer/queries because that metric gets incremented for each query but it only gets incremented by one, whereas some queries can reserve more than 1 merge buffer.
Release note
Add mergeBuffer/usedCount metric per query for the used merge buffers
This PR has:
- [x] been self-reviewed.
- [x] using the concurrency checklist (Remove this item if the PR doesn't have any relation to concurrency.)
- [x] added documentation for new or modified features or behaviors.
- [x] a release note entry in the PR description.
- [x] added Javadocs for most classes and all non-trivial methods. Linked related entities via Javadoc links.
- [x] added or updated version, license, or notice information in licenses.yaml
- [x] added comments explaining the "why" and the intent of the code wherever would not be obvious for an unfamiliar reader.
- [ ] added unit tests or modified existing tests to cover new code paths, ensuring the threshold for code coverage is met.
- [ ] added integration tests.
- [ ] been tested in a test Druid cluster.
@LakshSingla @gianm how can I run a local cluster to test the changes?
@TessaIO , you can try following the steps here Druid Local Quickstart
This pull request has been marked as stale due to 60 days of inactivity. It will be closed in 4 weeks if no further activity occurs. If you think that's incorrect or this pull request should instead be reviewed, please simply write any comment. Even if closed, you can still revive the PR at any time or discuss it on the [email protected] list. Thank you for your contributions.
/remove stale
This pull request has been marked as stale due to 60 days of inactivity. It will be closed in 4 weeks if no further activity occurs. If you think that's incorrect or this pull request should instead be reviewed, please simply write any comment. Even if closed, you can still revive the PR at any time or discuss it on the [email protected] list. Thank you for your contributions.
This pull request/issue has been closed due to lack of activity. If you think that is incorrect, or the pull request requires review, you can revive the PR at any time.
@TessaIO are you interested in getting this change in with some testing? I can help review the change when it's ready. Thanks!