+1 (non-binding)

It's very useful -- I've left a minor comment on the implementation pr.

On 2025/09/10 18:29:00 PengHui Li wrote:
> Hi Team,
>
> This is the official VOTE thread for PIP-441: Add Broker-Level Metrics for
> Skipped Non-Recoverable Data
>
> Currently, when Pulsar's autoSkipNonRecoverableData feature skips
> corrupted data to maintain topic availability, there is no visibility into
> when and
> how frequently this occurs. This creates operational blind spots where
> administrators
> cannot be alerted when data loss happens, have no audit trail for
> compliance requirements,
> and cannot distinguish between healthy systems and those silently losing
> data.
>
> Without these metrics, operators cannot determine whether issues are
> systematic (entire ledgers lost) or localized (partial corruption
> scenarios).
>
> Proposed Solution: This PIP proposes adding two new broker-level metrics to
> the BrokerOperabilityMetrics class:
>
>   1. pulsar_broker_non_recoverable_ledgers_skipped_total:
>       A counter incremented in ManagedLedgerImpl.skipNonRecoverableLedger()
>       each time an entire ledger is skipped due to complete
> unrecoverability.
>   2. pulsar_broker_non_recoverable_entries_skipped_total:
>       A counter incremented in
> ManagedCursorImpl.skipNonRecoverableEntries()
>       by the number of entries skipped when only partial ledger corruption
> occurs.
>
> The broker-level approach avoids adding a high-cardinality burden to the
> metrics
> system that would occur with topic-level metrics in large clusters.
> Operators can
> use these broker-level metrics for alerting and monitoring trends, then
> leverage
> existing broker logs for detailed forensic analysis of specific affected
> topics.
>
> The full proposal is available for review here:
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/24716
>
> The discussion mailing list:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/b638towc7o4qb8dsozys4c14s00yflfj
>
> Pushed out the implementation PR:
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/24726
>
> Regards,
> Penghui
>

Regards,
Yike

Reply via email to