Skip to content

TBS: Document discard_on_write_failure + expose it to the APM Integration #15330

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

Open
Tracked by #14931
lucabelluccini opened this issue Jan 22, 2025 · 4 comments
Open
Tracked by #14931
Assignees

Comments

@lucabelluccini
Copy link
Contributor

lucabelluccini commented Jan 22, 2025

Potential follow up of #15159

Changes required

This task will be similar to the sampling.tail.ttl task in #13525 in terms of the changes required

@carsonip
Copy link
Member

It was intentional to have sampling.tail.discard_on_write_failure undocumented, as it was supposed to be an escape hatch for users who are facing TBS storage limit issues while we look for a long term solution.

I understand the pain to configure this config (and many more configs not exposed in apm integration package) and I agree we should make it easier.

Regarding documentation, I'm not sure if the team is committed to support this config in the long run. cc @simitt

@isaacaflores2
Copy link
Contributor

isaacaflores2 commented May 23, 2025

@isaacaflores2
Copy link
Contributor

I documented all the steps here to validate the APM integration changes per @rubvs recommendation.
apm-integrations-validation-steps.md

@simitt
Copy link
Contributor

simitt commented May 26, 2025

@isaacaflores2 IMO https://github.com/elastic/apm-server/tree/main/dev_docs would be a good place for documenting how to test integration package changes for APM. You can reduce the discard_on_write_failure specifics, or keep them in as an example.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants