Promitor filter for Azure Generic resource is not working?

[karolflis-tomtom]

Hi guys.

Im trying to scrape SNAT ports metrics from Kubernetes Load balancer and that is working OK. However I cannot get "filter" field to work, no matter how i try. I tried it about dozen of different combination and it does simply not filter anything.

Example in documentation: https://docs.promitor.io/configuration/v2.x/metrics/generic-azure-resource

My example:

  - name: azure_kubernetes_load_balancer_snat_allocated_ports3
    description: "Amount of allocated SNAT ports"
    resourceType: Generic
    azureMetricConfiguration:
      metricName: AllocatedSnatPorts
      aggregation:
        type: Average
    resources:
    %{ for load_balancer in load_balancers }
    - resourceUri: Microsoft.Network/loadBalancers/${load_balancer.load_balancer_name}
      resourceGroupName: ${load_balancer.resource_group_name}
      filter: Protocol Type neq UDP
    %{ endfor ~}

I tried field filter with values like:

• Protocol Type neq UDP
• ProtocolType neq UDP
• any combination of quoting, double quoting, single quoting for individual words of "ProtocolType/Protocol Type", "UDP" as well as whole sentence.
• i tried to move "filter" field into "azureMetricConfiguration"

Has anyone managed to have it working? I spent several hours experimenting and im stuck.

I need to get metric and filter as on the screen: https://imgur.com/a/SakMP80

[tomkerkhove]

The notation you are looking for is ProtocolType ne 'UDP' but you have a good point - This needs better documentation so I have created #1740

The way I typically do when my filter is not working is:

1. Go to Azure portal
2. Open Developer Tools
3. Configure metric chart in portal
4. Check request in traffic

Do note that the agent telemetry should help you as well, for example, this is what I saw at first:

[06:41:13 FTL] BadRequest: only supports conditions of the form ' eq ', ' ne ' and ' sw ': ProtocolType ne UDP'

[karolflis-tomtom]

Thank you so much. This seems to be working. Indeed I've overlooked it should be 'ne' instead of 'neq'. Thank you again :)

[tomkerkhove]

No problem at all and we should make it easier for you!