Skip to content
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

[Monitoring] Collect cluster.metadata.display_name #33691

Closed
pickypg opened this issue Sep 14, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

[Monitoring] Collect cluster.metadata.display_name #33691

pickypg opened this issue Sep 14, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@pickypg
Copy link
Member

pickypg commented Sep 14, 2018

Now that #33325 has been merged, Monitoring can collect the arbitrary cluster.metadata.* keys. Across Kibana and ES, we can agree to use specific keys to define added behavior that benefits both sides, such as cluster.metadata.display_name.

We can use that as a way to allow the user to override the cluster_name (e.g., if it was never set or it is set to something like a UUID) as described in elastic/kibana#23022. The easiest approach would be to explicitly grab that key and include it in the cluster_stats, or possibly include all of the cluster.metadata key/value pairs and simply have the UI pluck the one that is interesting.

@elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-core-infra

@jasontedor
Copy link
Member

I think we should pull all the metadata keys, rather than a specific one that doesn't have meaning to Elasticsearch.

@pickypg
Copy link
Member Author

pickypg commented Sep 14, 2018

I agree that they should grab all of them, but I'm not sure how that will play into what they want to do on the Metricbeat side of the fence, which will need to reproduce the behavior.

@ycombinator
Copy link
Contributor

ycombinator commented Sep 14, 2018

We can grab all of them and pass them through from within Metricbeat too (we do something similar with Kibana settings today).

Question: do we want to index these values or just store them in .monitoring-es-*? For the display_name use case storing should be sufficient, so I'm inclined to start with just storing for now.

@pickypg
Copy link
Member Author

pickypg commented Sep 14, 2018

You won't be able to predictably index them without dynamic indexing, which can lead to collisions, so I do not suggest doing that. I would start with storing too.

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