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

Allow client to scrape a custom target while advertising a different FQDN #80

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mcastellini
Copy link

Some use cases might require exposing a given FQDN while targeting a different host name.

This is quite visibile when using a containerized version of the PushProx client to scrape an instance inside a docker-compose based deployment: if multiple instances of such deployments are referring to the same PushProx proxy, they will end up POSTing the same FQDN in /poll (e.g.: node-exporter), which in turn leads to naming clashes at proxy component level.

This PR allows to specify a --target option so that one would be able to specify a given FQDN while in practice being able to scrape an internal target without needing to worry of potential naming clashes at proxy level.

@hansmi
Copy link
Contributor

hansmi commented Jan 5, 2021

LGTM. I had a similar case where FQDNs resolve to a host's external IP address (e.g. 192.0.2.1), but exporters listen only on 127.0.0.1/::1. The solution was to bind-mount a custom /etc/hosts file in my Pushprox service instances.

@SuperQ FYI

@szaudowsky
Copy link

@hansmi @mcastellini any information about possible merge soon?

@mcastellini
Copy link
Author

@szaudowsky I rebased the PR against the latest master, though I have no idea if it will be merged soon.

@Liczi
Copy link

Liczi commented Jan 19, 2021

@brian-brazil @SuperQ are there any plans on a new release? Would it be possible to include this feature?

@roidelapluie
Copy link
Contributor

I am wondering if that should be a feature given that Prometheus itself does not support that. And also I wonder, if the maintainers of this repo want it, if that should be a request parameter instead.

@josefzahner
Copy link

Where is the problem that this PR hasn't been merged yet (since several months)? There are a few lines of code which has been modified. We really need this feature of setting the FQDN manually by a parameter as our raspberry pi's have issues with identifying the FQDN correctly. It's really unpredictable what they choose and requires a lot of fiddling. And we have cases where we don't know the domain name. So to make a long story short, it's very important that we can configure the FQDN manually with a parameter.

@Liczi
Copy link

Liczi commented Mar 11, 2021

More than that, it makes monitoring of docker services harder as they use service name as an FQDN inside the docker network. It basically forces us to use network_mode: host even though the push-proxy could work as a docker container and use internal addressing.

@roidelapluie
Copy link
Contributor

I have poked @SuperQ about this one. I still think this could be an HTTP parameter instead of a pushprox parameter.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants