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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

GitHub pipeline observability #22

Draft
wants to merge 26 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

GitHub pipeline observability #22

wants to merge 26 commits into from

Conversation

johannes-b
Copy link
Contributor

@johannes-b johannes-b commented Jan 9, 2025 •
edited
Loading

This package provides the artifacts to configure GitHub pipeline observability in Dynatrace using Monaco.
Besides, it contains a how to guide to configure GitHub to send the relevant data to Dynatrace.

The artifacts include:

  • OpenPipeline configuration in the SDLC.event scope
  • 2 Dashboards for GitHub pipeline/PR observability
    • GitHub Pull Request monitoring
    • GitHub Workflows monitoring

@johannes-b
First version of GitHub pipeline observability
2df5c20 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Update of readme
09e7ad4 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Minor change in readme
e1d4f43 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Changed Dashboards
12f4ed4 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Clean up sample data
c493575 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Update of artifacts
200aae9 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Changed file name
a7ee597 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Renamed files
bed3e3c 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Removed images
959496a 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Upate of OpenPipeline and Dashboards
3579d10 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Set version number
480b288 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
added fields
16159f3 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Removed DT_TOKEN
3ee8138 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Update of IDs and remove DT_TOKEN from manifest
08be9c4 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Update of how to guide
c9b3f28 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Minor changes
d61d725 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Added a security disclaimer
6967ed8 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Added the origin of the dashboard
894c56b 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Added FAQ section
2a8e891 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Added a share feedback section
9cacca3 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
stefaneberl
stefaneberl requested changes Feb 5, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@stefaneberl stefaneberl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please double check the usage of join and joinNested.

Example 5 of https://docs.dynatrace.com/docs/discover-dynatrace/references/dynatrace-query-language/commands/aggregation-commands#summarize describes a way to use summarize instead of join, which reduces the amount of data read by half.

@johannes-b
Changed title of a tile
97dc44e 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Proposal for change event
e6c24c8 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
@johannes-b
Changed queries to remove join
6288dbc 
Signed-off-by: Johannes Bräuer <[email protected]>
stefaneberl
stefaneberl reviewed Feb 10, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@stefaneberl stefaneberl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

More comments will follow.

...ub_pipeline_observability/pipeline_observability/document-dashboard/github.pull_request.json Outdated
},
"enabled": false
},
"query": "fetch events \n| filter event.kind == \"SDLC_EVENT\" \n| filter event.category == \"task\" \n| filter event.type == \"change\" \n| filter event.provider == \"github.com\"\n| sort timestamp desc\n| summarize { statuses = collectArray(event.status) }, by: { task.id, task.name, start_time, number, vcs.repository.name, vcs.ref.base.name, vcs.ref.base.revision, vcs.ref.head.name, vcs.ref.head.revision, ext.vcs.change.pull_request.url } \n| filter not in(statuses[0],array(\"merged\",\"closed\")) \n| filter in(vcs.repository.name, $Repository) \n| filter in(vcs.ref.base.name, $Branch)\n| summarize count()",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't the PR ID & full repo URL be sufficient for aggregation?
I'm a bit hesitant to have vcs.ref.base.revision in, especially since a user can rebase their PR & force push. I'm not sure if this will stay stable here.

In addition, certain filters, e.g. vcs.repository.name and the like should be applied before aggregating, limiting the number of records to aggregate.

...ub_pipeline_observability/pipeline_observability/document-dashboard/github.pull_request.json Outdated
},
"enabled": false
},
"query": "fetch events \n| filter event.kind == \"SDLC_EVENT\" \n| filter event.category == \"task\" \n| filter event.type == \"change\" \n| filter event.provider == \"github.com\"\n| filter in(vcs.repository.name, $Repository) \n| filter in(vcs.ref.base.name, $Branch)\n| sort timestamp desc\n| summarize { statuses = collectArray(event.status) }, by: { task.id, task.name, start_time,number, vcs.ref.base.name, vcs.ref.base.revision, vcs.ref.head.name, vcs.ref.head.revision, ext.vcs.change.pull_request.url } \n| filter not in(statuses[0],array(\"merged\",\"closed\")) \n| fieldsAdd OpenedPrDuration = toTimestamp(now()) - toTimestamp(start_time) \n| summarize max(OpenedPrDuration)",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Similar to above. I think certain summarize by attributes may change over the lifetime of a PR. I would consider the PR ID & the full URL to the repo as unique

...ub_pipeline_observability/pipeline_observability/document-dashboard/github.pull_request.json Outdated
},
"enabled": false
},
"query": "fetch events \n| filter event.kind == \"SDLC_EVENT\" \n| filter event.category == \"task\" \n| filter event.type == \"change\" \n| filter event.provider == \"github.com\"\n| sort timestamp desc\n| summarize { statuses = collectArray(event.status), actions = collectArray(vcs.change.state) }, by: { task.id, task.name, start_time,number, vcs.repository.name, vcs.ref.base.name, vcs.ref.base.revision, vcs.ref.head.name, vcs.ref.head.revision, ext.vcs.change.pull_request.url } \n| filter not in(statuses[0],array(\"merged\", \"closed\")) \n| filter contains(toString(actions),\"reopened\")\n| filter in(vcs.repository.name, $Repository) \n| filter in(vcs.ref.base.name, $Branch)\n| summarize count()",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The filter applied after the summariz should be reconsidered. It would make sense to apply it before the aggregation.

Furthermore, there is a sort timestamp desc, which is IMHO not necessary, or at least I don't see it.

...ub_pipeline_observability/pipeline_observability/document-dashboard/github.pull_request.json Outdated
},
"enabled": false
},
"query": "fetch events \n| filter event.kind == \"SDLC_EVENT\" \n| filter event.category == \"task\" \n| filter event.type == \"change\" \n| filter event.provider == \"github.com\"\n| filter in(vcs.repository.name, $Repository) \n| filter in(vcs.ref.base.name, $Branch)\n| sort timestamp desc\n| summarize { statuses = collectArray(event.status) }, by: { task.id, task.name, start_time, ext.vcs.change.pull_request.number, vcs.ref.base.name, vcs.ref.base.revision, vcs.ref.head.name, vcs.ref.head.revision, ext.vcs.change.pull_request.url, vcs.change.id } \n| filter not in(statuses[0],array(\"merged\",\"closed\")) \n| fields \nIn_open_status = toTimestamp(now()) - toTimestamp(start_time),\nPR = ext.vcs.change.pull_request.number, \nTitle = task.name,\nURL = ext.vcs.change.pull_request.url,\nHeadName = vcs.ref.head.name, \nHeadRevision = vcs.ref.head.revision, \nBaseName = vcs.ref.base.name, \nBaseRevision = vcs.ref.base.revision,\nCreatedAt = start_time, \nGlobalId = vcs.change.id \n| sort In_open_status desc",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the sort timestamp desc necessary?

I think the summarize by attributes should be reconsidered, similarly to my previous comments.

@martin-hoelbling
Copy link

Tested the Monaco setup (prerequisites steps 1-5) and deployed configuration incl. merge - everything works as expected.

@stefaneberl
Copy link

During a meeting with @johannes-b on Feb 19th, it was agreed on to optimize the dashboard queries at a later stage.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@stefaneberl stefaneberl stefaneberl requested changes

@christian-kreuzberger-dtx christian-kreuzberger-dtx christian-kreuzberger-dtx left review comments

@wlfghdr wlfghdr wlfghdr left review comments

Requested changes must be addressed to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@johannes-b @martin-hoelbling @stefaneberl @christian-kreuzberger-dtx @wlfghdr