Prometheus Monitoring

Would you be open to Prometheus monitoring, if yes how do you imagine it being implemented?

telemetry({
  prometheus: '0.0.0.0:9245'
});

thoughts?

Sure, Prometheus support would be cool. To maintain backwards compatibility and avoid the appearance of supporting multiple active telemetry sinks we should probably add a 3rd argument telemetry(host, port, type) where type would default to statsd/statsite wire protocol.

The example I had originally I added a third arg but I thought it felt weird that with one telemetry sink it was a remote host and with another it was a listener.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Nathan Brown [email protected] wrote:

Sure, Prometheus support would be cool. To maintain backwards compatibility and avoid the appearance of supporting multiple active telemetry sinks we should probably add a 3rd argument telemetry(host, port, type) where type would default to statsd/statsite wire protocol.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/nbrownus/streamstash/issues/10#issuecomment-327869213, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAnU7mfvbdRVgdYL4Ur2mnY_3XpsQiLks5sgChDgaJpZM4PP-d_ .

Prometheus polls telemetry?

It does indeed! https://prometheus.io/docs/introduction/faq/#why-do-you-pull-rather-than-push

Let me know if that changes your above suggestion.

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Nathan Brown [email protected] wrote:

Prometheus polls telemetry?

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/nbrownus/streamstash/issues/10#issuecomment-328169845, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAnU2FO43GzOtNKmuS5SRTBQpNxsVyOks5sgX1dgaJpZM4PP-d_ .

I still think the three arguments will be less confusing here.