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

InfluxDB bucket retention #512

Open
mpass99 opened this issue Nov 29, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

InfluxDB bucket retention #512

mpass99 opened this issue Nov 29, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@mpass99
Copy link
Contributor

mpass99 commented Nov 29, 2023

No description provided.

@mpass99
Copy link
Contributor Author

mpass99 commented Nov 29, 2023

@MrSerth What would be a suitable retention?

  • The telegraf-bucket already has a retention of 30 days.
  • For the poseidon-bucket it depends
    • General Information
      • poseidon_/execute, poseidon_/execution-environments, poseidon_/files, poseidon_/files/raw, poseidon_/files_list, poseidon_/health, poseidon_/version, poseidon_/websocket, poseidon_createOrUpdate, poseidon_deleteRunner, poseidon_environments, poseidon_file_download, poseidon_list, poseidon_aws_executions, poseidon_nomad_executions, poseidon_nomad_idle_runners, poseidon_poolsize, poseidon_provideRunner, poseidon_used_runners
    • Debug Information
      • poseidon_nomad_allocations, poseidon_nomad_events

While the general information might be interesting for future analysis, the debug information likely is not and probably takes up the most disk space. We might set up an Influx Task to regularly delete those data points older than something (30d).

@MrSerth
Copy link
Member

MrSerth commented Nov 30, 2023

Ah, thanks for making this overview here -- I like that.

  • In general, I agree with your (proposed) retention policies: Having the Telegraf and Poseidon debug information ready for something like 30days is nice; for the debugging, we could actually decide to extend that a little (to two months?) since we would have had some issues in assessing the Sentry issues otherwise.
  • For implementing the retention, I though of using a retention policy rather than an Influx Task -- where do you see the advantage?
  • Are we sure that we don't need any old data for resolving remaining Sentry issues? I just want to ensure that we don't delete necessary debug information for old issues without any recent activity.
  • Can we persist this overview (with the upcoming changes) somewhere (e.g., in the codeocean-terraform repo), so that we don't loose that?

@MrSerth MrSerth added the pending label Feb 7, 2024
@mpass99
Copy link
Contributor Author

mpass99 commented Oct 11, 2024

I though of using a retention policy rather than an Influx Task -- where do you see the advantage?

Judging by my superficial understanding, retention policies allow us to delete the data of the whole bucket, but not to specify just one or two measurements to be deleted.

Are we sure that we don't need any old data for resolving remaining Sentry issues?

That's a fair point and proved to be useful in recent history. Now, however, might be a good point in time to implement the bucket retention. We resolved many bugs and Sentry issues and had many corresponding changes that might render old data unuseful, anyway.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants