[GitHub] [cxf] shark300 commented on a change in pull request #642: [CXF-8213] Add Micrometer metric support for JAX-WS

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[GitHub] [cxf] shark300 commented on a change in pull request #642: [CXF-8213] Add Micrometer metric support for JAX-WS

GitBox

shark300 commented on a change in pull request #642:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cxf/pull/642#discussion_r506970818



##########
File path: rt/features/metrics/src/main/java/org/apache/cxf/metrics/micrometer/MicrometerMetricsContext.java
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+/**
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+ * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
+ * distributed with this work for additional information
+ * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+ * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
+ * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
+ * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
+ * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
+ * specific language governing permissions and limitations
+ * under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.apache.cxf.metrics.micrometer;
+
+import java.util.ArrayList;
+import java.util.List;
+import java.util.Set;
+import java.util.function.Supplier;
+
+import com.google.common.collect.Iterables;
+
+import org.apache.cxf.message.Exchange;
+import org.apache.cxf.message.Message;
+import org.apache.cxf.metrics.MetricsContext;
+import org.apache.cxf.metrics.micrometer.provider.TagsCustomizer;
+import org.apache.cxf.metrics.micrometer.provider.TagsProvider;
+import org.apache.cxf.metrics.micrometer.provider.TimedAnnotationProvider;
+
+import io.micrometer.core.annotation.Timed;
+import io.micrometer.core.instrument.MeterRegistry;
+import io.micrometer.core.instrument.Tag;
+import io.micrometer.core.instrument.Timer;
+
+public class MicrometerMetricsContext implements MetricsContext {
+
+    private final MeterRegistry registry;
+    private final TagsProvider tagsProvider;
+    private final TimedAnnotationProvider timedAnnotationProvider;
+    private final List<TagsCustomizer> tagsCustomizers;
+
+    private final String metricName;
+    private final boolean autoTimeRequests;
+
+    public MicrometerMetricsContext(MeterRegistry registry, TagsProvider tagsProvider,
+                                    TimedAnnotationProvider timedAnnotationProvider,
+                                    List<TagsCustomizer> tagsCustomizers, String metricName, boolean autoTimeRequests) {
+        this.registry = registry;
+        this.tagsProvider = tagsProvider;
+        this.timedAnnotationProvider = timedAnnotationProvider;
+        this.tagsCustomizers = tagsCustomizers;
+        this.metricName = metricName;
+        this.autoTimeRequests = autoTimeRequests;
+    }
+
+    @Override
+    public void start(Exchange ex) {
+        Message request = ex.getInMessage();
+        TimingContext timingContext = TimingContext.get(request);
+        if (timingContext == null) {
+            startAndAttachTimingContext(request);
+        }
+    }
+
+    @Override
+    public void stop(long timeInNS, long inSize, long outSize, Exchange ex) {
+        Message request = ex.getInMessage();
+        TimingContext timingContext = TimingContext.get(request);
+        if (timingContext == null) {

Review comment:
       Good catch!
   Yes, it should not happen.
   I've checked `Timer#Sample` class. On the one hand we can use `timeInNS` to calculate "original" timestamp from current time and this one. On the other hand, we have to create a custom implementation of `Clock#monotonicTime` for creating a "start" `Timer#Sample`. As I see, this is used internally and it has a mock implementation for testing.
   In my opinion we should skip the record call in this case, and log this case as a warning.




----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[hidden email]