receive: remove sort on label hashing #5224
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
Signed-off-by: Pablo RUTH <contact@pablo-ruth.fr>
pablo-ruth
force-pushed
the
removeHashringLabelSort
branch
from
fa26613 to
a8a0542
Compare
squat
previously approved these changes
Mar 9, 2022
|
Great! I added the CHANGELOG entry :) |
Signed-off-by: Pablo RUTH <contact@pablo-ruth.fr>
pablo-ruth
force-pushed
the
removeHashringLabelSort
branch
from
9854313 to
ee29f40
Compare
squat
approved these changes
Mar 9, 2022
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Changes
I removed the sort on labels before hashinf them when using an hashring. The Prometheus remote write specification stand that:
So I'm wondering if it's necessary to keep the sort on the receive side tor Thanos infrastructure with two "router only" receivers. I've done a pprof and I see that the sort code is using around 8% of CPU time, so it could be a significant optimization if we can skip it:
Verification
We are using the patched version for some time on our receivers and confirmed a reduction in resource consumption. We didn't see any side-effect.