Literal Expressions in LogQL #1677
Merged
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
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1677 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 62.81% 63.43% +0.61%
==========================================
Files 112 121 +9
Lines 8741 9011 +270
==========================================
+ Hits 5491 5716 +225
- Misses 2837 2877 +40
- Partials 413 418 +5
|
owen-d
force-pushed
the
feature/ast-literals
branch
from
7d9174d
to
e33ec36
Compare
|
Don't merge this until I add support for a response result type for and I should add another |
cyriltovena
reviewed
Feb 12, 2020
|
Hey @cyriltovena I updated this to properly use The ugly:
I'll integration test this tomorrow or Monday. [edit] I found a way to improve the evaluator code. This hinges on proving that a binary expression necessarily produces a vector evaluator. This is assured because all binary ops where both legs are literals can be recursively reduced at construction Once that's assured, we simply check if the root node of an AST is a literal and handle that edge case. Otherwise, all subsequent evaluators will produce vectors which allows us to reduce the type complexity therein. |
cyriltovena
reviewed
Feb 14, 2020
| @@ -288,6 +288,21 @@ func TestEngine_NewInstantQuery(t *testing.T) { | |||
| promql.Sample{Point: promql.Point{T: 60 * 1000, V: 0.2}, Metric: labels.Labels{labels.Label{Name: "app", Value: "fuzz"}}}, | |||
| }, | |||
| }, | |||
| { | |||
| // healthcheck | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we have a test for Literal + Vector ?
cyriltovena
reviewed
Feb 14, 2020
| {`topk(3,count_over_time({foo="bar"}[5m])) by (foo,bar)`, []int{TOPK, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, IDENTIFIER, COMMA, COUNT_OVER_TIME, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, OPEN_BRACE, IDENTIFIER, EQ, STRING, CLOSE_BRACE, DURATION, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, BY, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, IDENTIFIER, COMMA, IDENTIFIER, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS}}, | ||
| {`bottomk(10,sum(count_over_time({foo="bar"}[5m])) by (foo,bar))`, []int{BOTTOMK, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, IDENTIFIER, COMMA, SUM, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, COUNT_OVER_TIME, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, OPEN_BRACE, IDENTIFIER, EQ, STRING, CLOSE_BRACE, DURATION, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, BY, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, IDENTIFIER, COMMA, IDENTIFIER, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS}}, | ||
| {`topk(3,count_over_time({foo="bar"}[5m])) by (foo,bar)`, []int{TOPK, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, NUMBER, COMMA, COUNT_OVER_TIME, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, OPEN_BRACE, IDENTIFIER, EQ, STRING, CLOSE_BRACE, DURATION, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, BY, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, IDENTIFIER, COMMA, IDENTIFIER, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS}}, | ||
| {`bottomk(10,sum(count_over_time({foo="bar"}[5m])) by (foo,bar))`, []int{BOTTOMK, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, NUMBER, COMMA, SUM, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, COUNT_OVER_TIME, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, OPEN_BRACE, IDENTIFIER, EQ, STRING, CLOSE_BRACE, DURATION, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, BY, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, IDENTIFIER, COMMA, IDENTIFIER, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS}}, | ||
| {`sum(max(rate({foo="bar"}[5m])) by (foo,bar)) by (foo)`, []int{SUM, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, MAX, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, RATE, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, OPEN_BRACE, IDENTIFIER, EQ, STRING, CLOSE_BRACE, DURATION, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, BY, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, IDENTIFIER, COMMA, IDENTIFIER, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS, BY, OPEN_PARENTHESIS, IDENTIFIER, CLOSE_PARENTHESIS}}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would be nice to have some new tests here too.
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
Introduces numeric literals!
Description
Binary arithmetic operators are now defined between two literals (scalars), a literal and a vector, and two vectors.
Between two literals, the behavior is obvious: they evaluate to another literal that is the result of the operator applied to both scalar operands (1 + 1 = 2).
Between a vector and a literal, the operator is applied to the value of every data sample in the vector. E.g. if a time series vector is multiplied by 2, the result is another vector in which every sample value of the original vector is multiplied by 2.
Between two vectors, a binary arithmetic operator is applied to each entry in the left-hand side vector and its matching element in the right-hand vector. The result is propagated into the result vector with the grouping labels becoming the output label set. Entries for which no matching entry in the right-hand vector can be found are not part of the result.
Examples
Implement a health check with a simple query:
1 + 1Double the rate of a a log stream's entries:
sum(rate({app="foo"})) * 2