Add task_latency_processing_no_persistence metric and context counter#9367
Open
awln-temporal wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Open
Add task_latency_processing_no_persistence metric and context counter#9367awln-temporal wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
awln-temporal wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
0c551c8 to
b4999cb
Compare
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 changed?
Add
task_latency_processing_no_persistencemetric and context counter. Allows any task to emit this metric as long as TaskPersistenceLatency Counter is incremented.This metric is emitted by Executable MetricsHandler, which adds
namespace,operation,taskType,serviceNameas Metric Tags.In this change, only Visibility tasks publish
task_latency_processing_no_persistence.Why?
Separate Visibility task latency from persistence, and allow any other task to emit this metric in the future.
How did you test it?