NETOBSERV-1955: fix wrong metrics for conversation tracking

[jotak]

Description

This is fixing wrong metrics that are due to accumulating bytes/packets counters from heartbits, which are not relevant for accumulation.

However, conversation tracking is still bad at providing accurate metrics for long-standing connections, as the ConnectionEnded event may be very long to come. So this is going to remain as a known limitation of Conversation Tracking.

I don't think there's any urgency to backport this on 1.8

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• Does this PR require product documentation?
  • If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labeled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
  • If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
  • If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
  • Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
  • Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
  • No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jotak: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1955 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.19.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Description

This is fixing wrong metrics that are due to accumulating bytes/packets counters from heartbits, which are not relevant for accumulation.

However, conversation tracking is still bad at providing accurate metrics for long-standing connections, as the ConnectionEnded event may be very long to come. So this is going to remain as a known limitation of Conversation Tracking.

I don't think there's any urgency to backport this on 1.8

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• Does this PR require product documentation?
• If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labeled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
• If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
• If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
• Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
• Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
• No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from jotak. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 71.42857% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 62.66%. Comparing base (626c5a9) to head (e1ba68d).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pkg/metrics/predefined_metrics.go	71.42%	6 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1096      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   62.42%   62.66%   +0.23%     
==========================================
  Files          77       77              
  Lines       11581    11599      +18     
==========================================
+ Hits         7230     7269      +39     
+ Misses       3896     3878      -18     
+ Partials      455      452       -3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	62.66% <71.42%> (+0.23%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
apis/flowcollector/v1beta2/flowcollector_types.go	100.00% <ø> (ø)
pkg/metrics/predefined_metrics.go	97.36% <71.42%> (-2.64%)	⬇️

... and 5 files with indirect coverage changes

[jpinsonneau]

LGTM !

[Amoghrd]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New images:

• quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator:4a1ca36
• quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-bundle:v0.0.0-4a1ca36
• quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-catalog:v0.0.0-4a1ca36

They will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build:

# Direct deployment, from operator repo
IMAGE=quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator:4a1ca36 make deploy

# Or using operator-sdk
operator-sdk run bundle quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-bundle:v0.0.0-4a1ca36

Or as a Catalog Source:

apiVersion: operators.coreos.com/v1alpha1
kind: CatalogSource
metadata:
  name: netobserv-dev
  namespace: openshift-marketplace
spec:
  sourceType: grpc
  image: quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-catalog:v0.0.0-4a1ca36
  displayName: NetObserv development catalog
  publisher: Me
  updateStrategy:
    registryPoll:
      interval: 1m

[Amoghrd]

Need https://issues.redhat.com/browse/NETOBSERV-2108 fix to land to test this PR

[jotak]

@Amoghrd until NETOBSERV-2108 is done it's still possible to test the operator via the other alternatives (with operator-sdk, or with make deploy)

[Amoghrd]

oh yeah its been a while since I used it, so had forgotten about it. Will test it using make deploy

[Amoghrd]

@jotak Could you rebase the PR

[Amoghrd]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New images:

• quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator:b3f2bf0
• quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-bundle:v0.0.0-b3f2bf0
• quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-catalog:v0.0.0-b3f2bf0

They will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build:

# Direct deployment, from operator repo
IMAGE=quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator:b3f2bf0 make deploy

# Or using operator-sdk
operator-sdk run bundle quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-bundle:v0.0.0-b3f2bf0

Or as a Catalog Source:

apiVersion: operators.coreos.com/v1alpha1
kind: CatalogSource
metadata:
  name: netobserv-dev
  namespace: openshift-marketplace
spec:
  sourceType: grpc
  image: quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-catalog:v0.0.0-b3f2bf0
  displayName: NetObserv development catalog
  publisher: Me
  updateStrategy:
    registryPoll:
      interval: 1m

[Amoghrd]

@jotak I am not understanding how to go about verifying this. I deployed the operator and flowcollector with Conversations enabled. I am looking at the metrics for conversation tracking below

Should I be looking at something specific here?

[jotak]

@Amoghrd just compare the metrics dashboards with & without conversation tracking. Enabling conversation tracking should not make the metrics look very different, but without this PR, it did screw them up
This is what I wrote in the JIRA description:

When Conversation Tracking is enabled with logTypes=All or logTypes=Conversations, metrics generated (such as bytes and packet rates) show much bigger numbers than expected.

[jotak]

@Amoghrd I took some screenshots to help:

1. Without conversation tracking:
   
   Traffic is mostly flat, except occasional spikes (here from openshift-marketplace namespace); around 2 MBps

2. With logTypes: Conversations (and not this PR):
   
   Traffic seems increasing out of control. It's wrong, the metrics are flawed.

3. With this PR and still logTypes: Conversations:
   
   Deploying this PR, traffic is back to expected levels, here around 2MBps

[openshift-ci]

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

[openshift-ci]

@jotak: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-operator	b7d6eaa	link	false	/test e2e-operator
ci/prow/ci-index-noo-bundle	b7d6eaa	link	true	/test ci-index-noo-bundle

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.