-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 200
ENT-6511: Increase cf-monitord measurement slots from 100 to 300 #6239
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -67,10 +67,23 @@ char **GetObservableNames(const char *ts_key_path) | |
|
|
||
| if (fgets(line, CF_MAXVARSIZE, f) == NULL) | ||
| { | ||
| Log(LOG_LEVEL_ERR, | ||
| "Error trying to read ts_key from file '%s'. (fgets: %s)", | ||
| filename, | ||
| GetErrorStr()); | ||
| if (ferror(f)) | ||
| { | ||
| Log(LOG_LEVEL_ERR, | ||
| "Error trying to read ts_key from file '%s'. (fgets: %s)", | ||
| filename, | ||
| GetErrorStr()); | ||
| } | ||
| /* The ts_key has fewer entries than CF_OBSERVABLES -- e.g. it | ||
| * was written by an older agent with a smaller CF_OBSERVABLES. | ||
| * Fill the remaining names so the returned array keeps its | ||
| * documented non-NULL guarantee (callers index all | ||
| * CF_OBSERVABLES entries). */ | ||
| for (int j = i; j < CF_OBSERVABLES; ++j) | ||
| { | ||
| snprintf(buf, CF_MAXVARSIZE, "spare[%d]", j); | ||
| temp[j] = xstrdup(buf); | ||
| } | ||
|
Comment on lines
+77
to
+86
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Is this still needed post migration fix ?
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yes — this is about the
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. And, just FYI, I have a follow-up PR waiting to changes the storage to only require what is used |
||
| break; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pre-existing. But, should probably be
StringEndsWith()? Could be a follow-up commit.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
in this PR or completely separately?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Up to you. I'm OK with leaving it as is as well
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think I will leave it for now. Seems to have been intentionally changed from StringsEndsWith to StringContains 3e98366c3