You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We had a situation where one ingester was somehow hitting more throttling than the others, and the queue overall didn't get big enough to trigger a scale-up but that one ingester OOMed.
Need to be a bit careful releasing that change, as it gives a very different meaning to --metrics.target-queue-length. Now I think about it, maybe we could have both - a target value which guides gentle scaling, and a max value for one ingester which triggers more urgent measures.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any activity in the past 30 days. It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any activity in the past 60 days. It will be closed in 15 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
We had a situation where one ingester was somehow hitting more throttling than the others, and the queue overall didn't get big enough to trigger a scale-up but that one ingester OOMed.
Any lines like this should use
max()
notsum()
:cortex/pkg/chunk/aws/metrics_autoscaling.go
Line 30 in 9fe46d2
Need to be a bit careful releasing that change, as it gives a very different meaning to
--metrics.target-queue-length
. Now I think about it, maybe we could have both - a target value which guides gentle scaling, and a max value for one ingester which triggers more urgent measures.See also #921
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: