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

File read log interval #22095

Closed
xufeixianggithub opened this issue Dec 30, 2024 · 1 comment
Closed

File read log interval #22095

xufeixianggithub opened this issue Dec 30, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
type: feature A value-adding code addition that introduce new functionality.

Comments

@xufeixianggithub
Copy link

A note for the community

  • Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
  • If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

Use Cases

Currently, the cpu is higher when using files to read logs, because there is a practical scenario that sometimes you need to restart the application, or just access the Vector, the file is read hundreds of meters, then the log will be read quickly, and the cpu will be high. Of course, I know that some solutions connect to middleware such as Mq first. But it comes at a premium.

Attempted Solutions

No response

Proposal

No response

References

No response

Version

No response

@xufeixianggithub xufeixianggithub added the type: feature A value-adding code addition that introduce new functionality. label Dec 30, 2024
@jszwedko
Copy link
Member

jszwedko commented Jan 2, 2025

Hi @xufeixianggithub ,

I see the issue you are describing, but I don't think we'd solve it by adding configuration to the file source. Instead, I think a more holistic way to solve this problem is for the throttle transform to support applying back-pressure. This is being tracked by #13651

You could also consider configuring the sink to apply back-pressure by limiting the concurrency or batch sizes.

I'll close this issue, but let me know if you disagree with my assessment!

@jszwedko jszwedko closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Jan 2, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: feature A value-adding code addition that introduce new functionality.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants