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

Add documentation for Ruler remote evaluation via Query Frontend #6198

Closed
yeya24 opened this issue Sep 9, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #6200
Closed

Add documentation for Ruler remote evaluation via Query Frontend #6198

yeya24 opened this issue Sep 9, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #6200
Assignees
Labels
component/documentation component/rules Bits & bobs todo with rules and alerts: the ruler, config service etc. help wanted

Comments

@yeya24
Copy link
Contributor

yeya24 commented Sep 9, 2024

As a follow up of #6151, we need to add relevant doc to document this option.
How it can be enabled, configuration parameters, pros and cons of the rule evaluation via Query Frontend and Ruler.

@yeya24 yeya24 added help wanted component/rules Bits & bobs todo with rules and alerts: the ruler, config service etc. component/documentation labels Sep 9, 2024
@SungJin1212
Copy link
Contributor

@yeya24
Could I take it?
Also, should I change the cortex architecture? I feel like the current architecture is sufficient.

@yeya24
Copy link
Contributor Author

yeya24 commented Sep 9, 2024

@SungJin1212 Sure, I will assign to you.

We can leave Cortex architecture unchanged as Ruler evaluate via Query Frontend is just an experimental feature.

@SungJin1212
Copy link
Contributor

SungJin1212 commented Sep 9, 2024

@yeya24
Which section is suitable among Operations, Proposals, and Guides? The Proposals or Guide section would be suitable.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
component/documentation component/rules Bits & bobs todo with rules and alerts: the ruler, config service etc. help wanted
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants