Skip to content

Update circuit_breaker.asciidoc #40755

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

111andre111
Copy link
Contributor

Tested http://localhost:9200/_nodes/stats/breaker
and found out that the in flight requests are divided with underscores.
This is wrong some versions already.

@danielmitterdorfer
Copy link
Member

Thanks for your PR but I think there is a misconception. What you've changed is the circuit breaker setting for the limit and if you check the source code the documentation is already correct:

Setting.memorySizeSetting("network.breaker.inflight_requests.limit", "100%", Property.Dynamic, Property.NodeScope);

The output in the node stats API is defined by this:

String IN_FLIGHT_REQUESTS = "in_flight_requests";

I agree that it would be good if those two would be aligned but as this is a breaking change we can only introduce it in the next major version.

As such I think this PR can be closed without merging but would you be up to create a PR for the change that I've proposed (note that this requires documenting it also in the breaking changes docs for 8.0.0).

@111andre111
Copy link
Contributor Author

111andre111 commented Apr 3, 2019 via email

@danielmitterdorfer
Copy link
Member

Of course. Just ping if you have additional questions.

@111andre111
Copy link
Contributor Author

111andre111 commented Apr 4, 2019 via email

@danielmitterdorfer
Copy link
Member

IMHO the less invasive change is to settle on inflight_requests as the name. This only changes the name in log output and node stats output but avoids breaking all related settings (it is still a breaking change but the scope is smaller). Does this make sense?

@111andre111
Copy link
Contributor Author

111andre111 commented Apr 4, 2019 via email

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants