I need to send kafka-go's internal statistics to Prometheus. The ReaderStats struct already defines field tags beginning with metrics:... which look like they are meant to be used to configure Prometheus.
But so far I failed to find any existing code which could take advantage of these field tags.
Is there such existing code to do that or do I have to "manually" do the usual prometheus.NewCounterVec()...?
Related
I have an app written with reason-react using apollo-client. I have defined some fragments on the frontend to basically reuse some field definitions. I'm setting up automated tests for a components that uses fragments, but I keep getting this warning saying I need to use the IntrospectionFragmentMatcher.
'You are using the simple (heuristic) fragment matcher, but your queries contain union or interface types. Apollo Client will not be able to accurately map fragments. To make this error go away, use the `IntrospectionFragmentMatcher` as described in the docs: https://www.apollographql.com/docs/react/advanced/fragments.html#fragment-matcher'
I've tried setting up the fragment matcher according to the docs. The codegen result returns no types:
{
"__schema": {
"types": []
}
}
When I queried my server and looked at the manual method recommended by apollo-client, I noticed it would also return no types.
Another strange thing is that when I don't use the fragment matcher, I get the mocked response back but I just get the warnings from apollo. If I do use it then the mocked response doesn't return correctly.
Why would I query the graphql api for fragments defined in my frontend code? Why would I only received these errors when running the tests & using mock data, but not when running my actual application?
As the error states, the default fragment matcher does not work on intersection or union types. You will need to use Apollo's IntrospectionFragmentMatcher. It works by asking the server (introspecting) for information about your schema types, and then providing that information for reference to the cache so that it can match the fields accurately. It's not querying the server for information about the fragments you are defining on the front end, it's asking for data about the GraphQL schema that must be defined on your back end so that it can properly relate the two. There is an example in the documentation, also more information here.
As for why your server is not returning any types, that is a separate issue that would require more info to debug. If you're using Apollo Server, doublecheck your schema to make sure all the necessary types are defined properly and that you are passing them into the server when it's initialized.
This is an example resource tree.
I need to retrieve latest 48 hours' data of cnt-2 and cnt-0 all together. What kind of query string should I put to the request ?
/in-cse
/in-cse/ae-123
/in-cse/cnt-2
/in-cse/cin-21
/in-cse/cin-22
/in-cse/cin-23
/in-cse/ae-124
/in-cse/cnt-0
/in-cse/cin-01
/in-cse/cin-02
/in-cse/cin-03
/in-cse/cnt-1
/in-cse/cin-11
/in-cse/cin-22
/in-cse/cin-33
Where should I put the ids of cnt-0 and cnt-2 in the querystring ?
/onem2m/api/v1/~/in-cse?fu=2&crb=20190808T000000&cra=20190806T000000&ty=4
Also should I use only querystring to make discovery or is it valid to make a POST request ?
With the example request in your question you will also get all the matching <contentInstance> resources of cnt-1, because you do the discovery on the level of the IN-CSE. Unfortunately, you cannot have multiple targets in a single request, but I see at least two solutions that could work for your use case:
You can add labels two <contentInstance> resources and add label to your search.
/onem2m/api/v1/~/in-cse?fu=2&crb=20190808T000000&cra=20190806T000000&label=myLabel&ty=4
You can add a <group> that contains the <container> resources that are important to your use case (ie. cnt-0 and cnt-2) and make the <group>'s fanoutPoint the target of your discovery request. The CSE is then responsible to redirect the discovery to each member of the <group>.
/onem2m/api/v1/~/in-cse/aGroup/fopt?fu=2&crb=20190808T000000&cra=20190806T000000&ty=4
In my opinion the second method is the more "elegant" one because it makes the (application) relationship of the two <container> resources clearer , but the first one might also be feasible if your <contentInstance> resources are tagged using labels anyway.
Regarding the POST request: For the HTTP binding query parameters are only allowed for filtering and discovery. Please have a look at TS-0009, section 6.2.2.2 Query component.
Btw, there are currently ongoing discussions in oneM2M to describe the differences between retrieval and discovery a bit better.
I am using Spring JPA with mongo.I have a requirement to use contains query on one of the fields.If end users(UI/Service) hits the GET Request and looks for information in EMAIL Field,I need to search based on text.Pretty much it is like.
https://docs.spring.io/spring-data/jpa/docs/current/reference/html/
This link explains that We can Use Contains to get the Data.
List<ScheduledNotification> findByMobileNumberContaining(String mobileNumber);
List<ScheduledNotification> findByEmailIdIgnoreCaseContaining(String emailId);
But when I am using this API,I am not able to get the data.So ,has any one done something like using Contains.
well ,I was not sending content type in header attribute in GET request.So yes it works,alright.There was no issue with method signature.
I wanted to write the document to marklogic database using marklogic mapreduce api, lets say here is the example. I wanted to add metadata to the document which i am writing it back to the marklogic database in the reducer -
context.write(outputURI, result);
If adding metadata to the document with mapreduce api of marklogic is possible please let me know.
For Metadata, I am assuming you are talking about the document properties fragment. For background on document properties, please see here: https://docs.marklogic.com/guide/app-dev/properties#id_19516
For use in MarkLogic mapreduce, please see here (the output classes):
https://docs.marklogic.com/guide/mapreduce/output#id_76625
I believe you need to extend/modify your example to also write content to the properties fragment using the PropertyOutputFormat class.
One of the sample applications in the same documentation is an example of saving content in the properties fragment. If, however, you would like to fast-track yourself by looking at some source code: see some examples - including writing to a document property fragment, see here: https://gist.github.com/evanlenz/2484318 - specifically LinkCountInProperty.java
Used property mapreduce.marklogic.output.content.collection with the configuration xml. Adding this property added inserted data to that collection.
I'm writing client-side code for an app that will query a GraphQL server. In a couple of places in my code, I'm passing around data that will eventually get turned into a query variable, so it needs to validate against a specific GraphQLInputType in my schema. On looking into some of the utilities that graphql-js provides, it looks like the isValidJSValue checker is exactly what I'm looking for, and its comments even mention that it's intended to be used to do just that.
The issue is that I don't have access to the GraphQL type I want to validate against as a JS object, which is what I'm pretty sure that function is looking for. I'm importing my schema (as an npm depdendency) as JSON, or I also have it in the schema notation. Is there some other utility I can use to get the JS type I need from one of those sources, and then use that to check my data with isValidJSValue? Or is there some other way I could go about this that I just haven't thought of?
You can use the JSON schema you have imported to construct an actual GraphQL schema instance using buildClientSchema here: https://github.com/graphql/graphql-js/blob/master/src/utilities/buildClientSchema.js
Then, it should be a simple matter of looking in the types field of the resulting schema to find your input type, and then calling isValidJSValue on it.
I'm curious, though - why validate the value on the client before sending it, rather than just relying on the validation the server will do?