Skip to content

/ anchore-engine

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

Jump to bottom

Feature Request: Scan time to be included in logs #299

Open
ykosaraju opened this issue Nov 8, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

Feature Request: Scan time to be included in logs #299

ykosaraju opened this issue Nov 8, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement good first issue

Comments

@ykosaraju
Copy link

@ykosaraju ykosaraju commented Nov 8, 2019 •
edited

Is this a request for help?:
NO

Is this a BUG REPORT or a FEATURE REQUEST? (choose one): FEATURE REQUEST

If this is a FEATURE REQUEST, please:

  • Describe the feature in detail as much as possible including possible cli and api behavior and how to test the feature.

Feature to include information in logging output for time taken for a scan.
This will help us fine tune our workflows to make sure scans complete (ex: jenkins plugin max-retries)
Also, if you are planning to add a basic metrics endpoint to the API , then the average time for scans per account would be a good metric to have
@zhill
Copy link
Member

@zhill zhill commented Nov 19, 2019

We have a bug to fix to get prometheus metrics working properly, if that were enabled and had a histogram view for the analysis time for each analyzer node, would that be sufficient, or is a log-based approach strongly preferred?
@ykosaraju
Copy link
Author

@ykosaraju ykosaraju commented Dec 7, 2019

@zhill : logs would be preferred but not strongly
Any way we can get that information would work
@zhill zhill added the enhancement label Jan 13, 2020
@ykosaraju
Copy link
Author

@ykosaraju ykosaraju commented Apr 27, 2020

@zhill : is the plan to add them in prometheus ?
"histogram view for the analysis time for each analyzer node, would that be sufficient" -> Yes that would work for my usecase
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement good first issue
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
2 participants
@zhill @ykosaraju
You can’t perform that action at this time.