You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Love the new kamal-proxy and I know we want to keep it simple and not add too many features.
However, I was hoping - similar to X-Request-Id - we could add X-Request-Start header for all incoming requests. This would allow any downstream system to assess the queuing time, which is probably the most important metric the app itself cannot determine.
All major monitoring systems seem to support this header and pick it up automatically when it's set - skylight, datadog, new relic etc.
I know that we could require users to run a separate proxy, but I'd argue that the simplicity of this should hopefully qualify for similar treatment as the request ID.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Love the new kamal-proxy and I know we want to keep it simple and not add too many features.
However, I was hoping - similar to
X-Request-Id
- we could addX-Request-Start
header for all incoming requests. This would allow any downstream system to assess the queuing time, which is probably the most important metric the app itself cannot determine.All major monitoring systems seem to support this header and pick it up automatically when it's set - skylight, datadog, new relic etc.
For more context: https://pawelurbanek.com/rails-performance-fixes#eliminate-request-queue-time
I know that we could require users to run a separate proxy, but I'd argue that the simplicity of this should hopefully qualify for similar treatment as the request ID.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: