[receiver/mongodb]: Add uptime/health metrics

[davidji99]

#17021

[runforesight]

Foresight Summary

    
Major Impacts

TestScraperScrape ❌ failed 9 times in 15 runs (60% fail rate).

build-and-test-windows duration(5 seconds) has decreased 44 minutes 19 seconds compared to main branch avg(44 minutes 24 seconds).

View More Details

⭕  build-and-test-windows workflow has finished in 5 seconds (44 minutes 19 seconds less than main branch avg.) and finished at 11th Jan, 2023.

---

Job	Failed Steps	Tests
windows-unittest-matrix	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
windows-unittest	-     🔗	N/A	See Details

---

✅  tracegen workflow has finished in 1 minute 16 seconds (1 minute 54 seconds less than main branch avg.) and finished at 11th Jan, 2023.

---

Job	Failed Steps	Tests
publish-stable	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
publish-latest	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
build-dev	-     🔗	N/A	See Details

---

✅  changelog workflow has finished in 1 minute 33 seconds (7 minutes 55 seconds less than main branch avg.) and finished at 11th Jan, 2023.

---

Job	Failed Steps	Tests
changelog	-     🔗	N/A	See Details

---

✅  check-links workflow has finished in 1 minute 49 seconds (56 seconds less than main branch avg.) and finished at 11th Jan, 2023.

---

Job	Failed Steps	Tests
changed files	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
check-links	-     🔗	N/A	See Details

---

✅  prometheus-compliance-tests workflow has finished in 3 minutes 16 seconds (5 minutes 38 seconds less than main branch avg.) and finished at 11th Jan, 2023.

---

Job	Failed Steps	Tests
prometheus-compliance-tests	-     🔗	✅ 21  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details

---

✅  build-and-test workflow has finished in 36 minutes 18 seconds (13 minutes 17 seconds less than main branch avg.) and finished at 11th Jan, 2023.

---

Job	Failed Steps	Tests
unittest-matrix (1.19, internal)	-     🔗	✅ 618  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.18, extension)	-     🔗	✅ 528  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
correctness-metrics	-     🔗	✅ 2  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.18, processor)	-     🔗	✅ 1481  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.18, internal)	-     🔗	✅ 618  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.19, processor)	-     🔗	✅ 1481  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
correctness-traces	-     🔗	✅ 17  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.19, extension)	-     🔗	✅ 528  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.19, receiver-0)	-     🔗	✅ 2565  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.18, receiver-0)	-     🔗	✅ 2565  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.18, exporter)	-     🔗	✅ 2462  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.18, other)	-     🔗	✅ 4429  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.19, other)	-     🔗	✅ 4429  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.19, exporter)	-     🔗	✅ 2462  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.18, receiver-1)	-     🔗	✅ 1883  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
unittest-matrix (1.19, receiver-1)	-     🔗	✅ 1883  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
integration-tests	-     🔗	✅ 55  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
setup-environment	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
check-collector-module-version	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
lint-matrix (receiver-0)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
lint-matrix (receiver-1)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
lint-matrix (processor)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
lint-matrix (exporter)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
lint-matrix (extension)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
lint-matrix (internal)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
lint-matrix (other)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
build-examples	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
check-codeowners	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
checks	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
lint	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
unittest (1.19)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
unittest (1.18)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
cross-compile (darwin, amd64)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
cross-compile (darwin, arm64)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
cross-compile (linux, 386)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
cross-compile (linux, amd64)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
cross-compile (linux, arm)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
cross-compile (linux, arm64)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
cross-compile (linux, ppc64le)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
cross-compile (windows, 386)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
cross-compile (windows, amd64)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
build-package (deb)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
build-package (rpm)	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
windows-msi	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
publish-check	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
publish-dev	-     🔗	N/A	See Details
publish-stable	-     🔗	N/A	See Details

---

✅  load-tests workflow has finished in 8 minutes 43 seconds (7 minutes 21 seconds less than main branch avg.) and finished at 11th Jan, 2023.

---

Job	Failed Steps	Tests
loadtest (TestTraceAttributesProcessor)	-     🔗	✅ 3  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
loadtest (TestIdleMode)	-     🔗	✅ 1  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
loadtest (TestMetric10kDPS|TestMetricsFromFile)	-     🔗	✅ 6  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
loadtest (TestTraceNoBackend10kSPS|TestTrace1kSPSWithAttrs)	-     🔗	✅ 8  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
loadtest (TestTraceBallast1kSPSWithAttrs|TestTraceBallast1kSPSAddAttrs)	-     🔗	✅ 10  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
loadtest (TestMetricResourceProcessor|TestTrace10kSPS)	-     🔗	✅ 12  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
loadtest (TestBallastMemory|TestLog10kDPS)	-     🔗	✅ 19  ❌ 0  ⏭ 0    🔗	See Details
setup-environment	-     🔗	N/A	See Details

---

🔎 See details on Foresight

^{*You can configure Foresight comments in your organization settings page.}

[djaglowski]

I am not sure we should add health / uptime metrics until open-telemetry/oteps#185 is decided.

[davidji99]

I am not sure we should add health / uptime metrics until open-telemetry/oteps#185 is decided.

Thanks for the referring me to doc. The proposal's mention of Prometheus hits home as I/my team often uses the Prometheus scrapers as a guide to what needs to be contributed to its OTel counterpart. We do this comparison because our team's customers have been using Prometheus and/or Datadog for monitoring ES, mongodb, etc.

Now do you know if there is any traction with the proposal? All of the comments are over one year old and I do see the health/uptime metric in Elasticsearchreceiver. I'm happy to make changes to the PR as needed but I'd like to know if the PR will be accepted in any form. Thanks.

[djaglowski]

Now do you know if there is any traction with the proposal? All of the comments are over one year old and I do see the health/uptime metric in Elasticsearchreceiver. I'm happy to make changes to the PR as needed but I'd like to know if the PR will be accepted in any form. Thanks.

I have not followed this closely, but it has been discussed more recently here. @jmacd, any chance you can advise on the status of this, or whether/how to move forward here?

[davidji99]

Now do you know if there is any traction with the proposal? All of the comments are over one year old and I do see the health/uptime metric in Elasticsearchreceiver. I'm happy to make changes to the PR as needed but I'd like to know if the PR will be accepted in any form. Thanks.

I have not followed this closely, but it has been discussed more recently here. @jmacd, any chance you can advise on the status of this, or whether/how to move forward here?

@jmacd Pinging you for a comment.

[davidji99]

@djaglowski Is this PR essentially going to be frozen until a decision will be made regarding health/uptime? I'd like to know to determine whether or not to fork this receiver for our collector distribution in the interim.

[djaglowski]

Since we don't have a standard yet, I think best effort is appropriate here. This looks pretty good to me, just a couple points of feedback.

[davidji99]

@djaglowski Updated

[datsabk]

@djaglowski - Doesn't look like health metrics are getting emitted for v5.0. Is there any additional configuration for v5.0?