Update traceql metrics to use the trace-level timestamp columns #3353
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mdisibio
requested review from
joe-elliott,
annanay25,
mapno,
kvrhdn,
zalegrala,
electron0zero,
ie-pham and
stoewer
as code owners
3 tasks
3 tasks
kvrhdn
pushed a commit
to kvrhdn/tempo
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2024
…ana#3353) * Update traceql metrics to use the trace-level timestamp columns conditionally * comments * Update benchmark, comment * lint * Change overlap cutoff to 20%
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does:
This PR circles back to a metrics TODO and uses the trace-level timestamp columns to more quickly filter the relevant traces in a block. The columns are not free and hinder performance unless they are able to filter out enough values. So it is decided at runtime based on the request and the block in question.
For now, did some local benchmarking, and using the simple heuristic that if we are looking at less than 20% of the block, then it's worth pulling in the columns. Between 20 and 100%, we avoid the extra I/O but spend more cycles throwing away traces (this is the current behavior). Open to suggestions on a better heuristic.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Checklist
CHANGELOG.mdupdated - the order of entries should be[CHANGE],[FEATURE],[ENHANCEMENT],[BUGFIX]