NETOBSERV-1935: enable metrics from list/nested fields

[jotak]

This makes it possible to generate metrics with labels/filters set on list fields (e.g. interfaces) and nested fields (e.g. soon-coming structured network events)

In metrics API, user needs to configure explicitly which list field needs to be "flattened", in order to be consumable as filters/labels.

Nested fields can be consumed as filters/labels with the ">" character;

E.g: flatten: [networkEvents], filters: [{key: "networkEvents>type", value: "acl"}], labels: [networkEvents>name] This is a sample config to filter a metric for ACL events and label it by name

Description

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
• Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• Does this PR require product documentation?
  • If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
  • If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
  • If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
  • Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
  • Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
  • No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jotak: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1935 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.18.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

This makes it possible to generate metrics with labels/filters set on list fields (e.g. interfaces) and nested fields (e.g. soon-coming structured network events)

In metrics API, user needs to configure explicitly which list field needs to be "flattened", in order to be consumable as filters/labels.

Nested fields can be consumed as filters/labels with the ">" character;

E.g: flatten: [networkEvents], filters: [{key: "networkEvents>type", value: "acl"}], labels: [networkEvents>name] This is a sample config to filter a metric for ACL events and label it by name

Description

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
• Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• Does this PR require product documentation?
• If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
• If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
• If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
• Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
• Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
• No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from jotak. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 84.57711% with 31 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 66.01%. Comparing base (8875dfe) to head (867ad8c).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pkg/pipeline/encode/metrics_common.go	78.78%	15 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
pkg/pipeline/encode/metrics/flattening.go	92.30%	4 Missing ⚠️
pkg/pipeline/encode/metrics/preprocess.go	86.36%	3 Missing ⚠️
pkg/pipeline/encode/encode_prom.go	71.42%	2 Missing ⚠️
pkg/pipeline/ingest/ingest_grpc.go	50.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #739      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   65.41%   66.01%   +0.59%     
==========================================
  Files         108      110       +2     
  Lines        7026     7138     +112     
==========================================
+ Hits         4596     4712     +116     
+ Misses       2110     2108       -2     
+ Partials      320      318       -2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	66.01% <84.57%> (+0.59%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
pkg/pipeline/encode/metrics/filtering.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ipeline/encode/opentelemetry/encode_otlpmetrics.go	40.38% <100.00%> (ø)
pkg/pipeline/extract/aggregate/aggregate.go	92.43% <100.00%> (ø)
pkg/pipeline/write/write_loki.go	71.42% <100.00%> (ø)
pkg/pipeline/ingest/ingest_grpc.go	75.86% <50.00%> (ø)
pkg/pipeline/encode/encode_prom.go	51.30% <71.42%> (ø)
pkg/pipeline/encode/metrics/preprocess.go	86.02% <86.36%> (ø)
pkg/pipeline/encode/metrics/flattening.go	92.30% <92.30%> (ø)
pkg/pipeline/encode/metrics_common.go	84.21% <78.78%> (+3.63%)	⬆️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes