Skip to content
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

Allow to configure scrape options by file #17

Closed
Cosaquee opened this issue Oct 3, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Allow to configure scrape options by file #17

Cosaquee opened this issue Oct 3, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@Cosaquee
Copy link

Cosaquee commented Oct 3, 2016

Hi !

Really nice module but right now i do not want to configure the scraping options directly in manifests file. I would like to provide my own prometheus.yml file with all the configuration already done.

As I can see right now you populate proemtheus.yml from prometheus::config class. What do you thing about one new parameter to prometheus class: scrape_config_file. If there will be something in this file just drop it in correct place and that is all. If this parameter is empty and scrape_configs are set do what you are doing right now.

@brutus333
Copy link
Collaborator

I was hit by this issue when using the module to upgrade prometheus & friends. scrape_configs is useful only initially or if you plan to configure prometheus only by puppet; which is not always the case.

I agree with your proposal. Can you please make a PR?

@Cosaquee
Copy link
Author

Cosaquee commented Oct 3, 2016

I have prometheus.yml file with more than 10 jobs so it is not convenient to keep it in pp files.

I will fork this and make a PR.

As I can see you still have Ruby 1.9.3 in your Travis tests. From my experience i can say that it is really hard to maintain Puppet modules with this Ruby version. It is really hard to make sure that dependencies are correct without doing some really ugly things in Gemfile.

Have you considered dropping support for 1.8.7 and 1.9.3 ?

@lobeck
Copy link
Contributor

lobeck commented Nov 14, 2016

Isn't this fixed by #25?

@Cosaquee
Copy link
Author

@lobeck I looks like #25 is exactly what i wanted. I will close this issue and thanks for you PR : )

roidelapluie pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2017
cegeka-jenkins pushed a commit to cegeka/puppet-prometheus that referenced this issue Aug 28, 2019
Rovanion pushed a commit to Rovanion/puppet-prometheus that referenced this issue May 5, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants