Skip to content

Conversation

@Hipska
Copy link
Contributor

@Hipska Hipska commented Oct 2, 2025

Summary

While #17277 implemented the selfstat.Collector, it only added support for output plugins. This PR adds support for aggregators, inputs, parsers, processors, serializers and secret-stores.

Checklist

  • No AI generated code was used in this PR

Related issues

based on #17344
based on #17277
required for #17733

@telegraf-tiger telegraf-tiger bot added the feat Improvement on an existing feature such as adding a new setting/mode to an existing plugin label Oct 2, 2025
@srebhan srebhan self-assigned this Oct 6, 2025
Copy link
Member

@srebhan srebhan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @Hipska for your contribution! One small request/question and a wishful thinking comment. Please ignore the latter! ;-)

tags["alias"] = config.Alias
}

maps.Copy(tags, config.Tags)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think we should do this! The target is to have the same tags as the model-level statistics...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The model level ones will also get this. Having these tags was the first thing I think of when seeing the spec, so that input plugin stats now also could have the tags defined on the plugin. Before there was no way to get this.

Maybe that should also go into an opt-in configuration parameter?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think the currently collected statistics will have these tags added right now. You are changing the statistics (and only for the inputs) and I don't want to open that box! Please remove the copy statement!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What about a config parameter for this? I would really like to have it, as it will make it possible to have more performant queries to the TSDB when added.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How about removing the line from this PR and we discuss the matter in a separate PR?

@Hipska
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hipska commented Oct 13, 2025

!retry-failed

@Hipska Hipska requested a review from srebhan October 20, 2025 08:49
@srebhan srebhan added the waiting for response waiting for response from contributor label Oct 23, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

feat Improvement on an existing feature such as adding a new setting/mode to an existing plugin waiting for response waiting for response from contributor

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants