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

aws_kinesis_firehose sink doesn't use batches properly #18939

Closed
gromnsk opened this issue Oct 25, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

aws_kinesis_firehose sink doesn't use batches properly #18939

gromnsk opened this issue Oct 25, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
type: feature A value-adding code addition that introduce new functionality.

Comments

@gromnsk
Copy link
Contributor

gromnsk commented Oct 25, 2023

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

to reduce costs on kinesis firehose all events should be written in batches. As I can see now there is no batches in this sink because when I switch some logs from another solution on vector incoming put requests metric in CloudWatch show significant increase(up to 1000x).
Same problem with big amount of put requests from vector can be cause of throttling on AWS firehose side because of limits on streams

Attempted Solutions

No response

Proposal

If I understood right aws_kinesis_firehose sink uses PutRecords endpoint instead of PutRecordsBatch, it would be great to switch to PutRecordsBatch endpoint to avoid problems with high cost of firehose and limitations problem

References

No response

Version

No response

@gromnsk gromnsk added the type: feature A value-adding code addition that introduce new functionality. label Oct 25, 2023
@neuronull
Copy link
Contributor

This looks like it could potentially be a duplicate of #1407

@gromnsk
Copy link
Contributor Author

gromnsk commented Oct 26, 2023

ah, sorry, yes, you are right, but there is almost 4 years and problem still exists

@gromnsk gromnsk closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Oct 26, 2023
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