We are considering moving out log analytics solution from ElasticSearch/Kibana to Splunk.
We currently use "document id" in ElasticSearch to deduplicate records when indexing :
https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/docs-index_.html
We generate the id using hash of the content of the each log-record.
In Splunk, I found the internal field "_cd" which is unique to each record in Splunk index: https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/8.1.0/Knowledge/Usedefaultfields
However, using HTTP Event Collector to ingest records, I couldn't find any way to embed this "_cd" field in the request :
https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/8.1.0/Data/HECExamples
Any tips on how to achieve this in Splunk ?
What are you trying to achieve?
If you're sending "unique" events to the HEC, or you're running UFs on "unique" logs, you'll never get duplicate "records when indexing".
It sounds like you (perhaps routinely?) resend the same data to your aggregation platform - which is not a problem with the aggregator, but with your sending process.
Almost like you're doing a MySQL/PostgreSQL "insert if not exists" operation. If that is a correct understanding of your situation, based on your statement
We currently use "document id" in ElasticSearch to deduplicate records when indexing:
https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/docs-index_.html
We generate the id using hash of the content of the each log-record.
then you need to evaluate what is going "wrong" in your sending process that you feel you need to pre-clean the data before ingesting it.
It is true that Splunk won't "deduplicate records when indexing" - because it presumes the data coming-in to be 'correct' from whatever is submitting it.
How are you getting duplicate data in the first place?
Fields in Splunk which begin with the underscore (eg _time, _cd, etc) are not editable/sendable - they're generated by Splunk when it receives data. IOW, they're all internal fields. Searchable. Usable. But not overrideable.
If you really have a problem with [lots of/too much] duplicate data, and there is no way to fix your sending process[es], then you'll need to rely on deduplication operations in SPL when searching for/reporting on whatever you've ingested (primarily by using stats and, when absolutely necessary/unavoidable, dedup).
HEC inputs don't go through the usual ingestion pipeline so not all internal fields are present.
Not that it matters, really, because Splunk doesn't deduplicate at index time. There is no provision for searching data to see if a given record is already present. Any deduplication must be done at search time.
One cannot use the _cd field to deduplicate at search time because two identical records will have different _cd values.
Consider using a tool such as Cribl to add a hash to each ingested record and use that hash in Splunk to deduplicate in your searches.
Good call #RichG. Cribl has some nice options for this use case.
https://cribl.io/blog/streaming-data-deduplication-with-cribl/
Be aware you can add other fields to HEC data if you are using Cribl LogStream. You get many more options using LogStream. It saved my old team so much time and effort.
Related
I'm a bit confused with setting up summary index in splunk.
I have an index name index_1 which receive logs from my app.
There are much too many logs, and I need to save an aggregation of them.
I have tried setting up the summary index from here to an index name summary,
but when I search the index there are no log entries.
My search is as follow:
index=index_1 ... level>30
I couldn't understand when to use the collect command and when setting up from the web ui is enough.
Your search, index=index_1 ... level>30 should reduce the number of events being returned, and to only those events you want to store in the summary index. In this case, it looks like you're only interested in keeping events where level>30.
At the end of your search, you need to include the collect command. The collect command will take the remaining events, and write it to the named index, so collect index=summary
Overall, your search should look like
index=index_1 ... level>30 | collect index=summary
Here is an older blog post discussing summary indexing that may help you understand the process and good practices around using it.
https://davidveuve.com/tech/how-i-use-summary-indexes-in-splunk/
According to BigQuery docs, you can ensure data consistency providing an insertId (https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/streaming-data-into-bigquery#dataconsistency). If it's not provided, BQ will try to ensure consistency based on internals Ids and best-effort.
Using the BQ API you can do that with the row_ids param (https://google-cloud-python.readthedocs.io/en/latest/bigquery/generated/google.cloud.bigquery.client.Client.insert_rows_json.html#google.cloud.bigquery.client.Client.insert_rows_json) but I can't find the same for the Apache Beam Python SDK.
Looking into the SDK I have noticed that a 'unique_row_id' property exist, but I really don't know how to pass my param to WriteToBigQuery()
How can I write into BQ (streaming) providing a row Id for deduplication?
Update:
If you use WriteToBigQuery then it will automatically create and
insert a unique row id called insertId for you, which will be inserted to bigquery. It's handled for you, you don't need to worry about it. :)
WriteToBigQuery is a PTransform, and in it's expand method calls BigQueryWriteFn
BigQueryWriteFn is a DoFn, and in it's process method calls _flush_batch
_flush_batch is a method that then calls the BigQueryWrapper.insert_rows method
BigQueryWrspper.insert_rows creates a list of bigquery.TableDataInsertAllRequest.RowsValueListEntry objects which contain the insertId and the row data as a json object
The insertId is generated by calling the unique_row_id method which returns a value consisting of UUID4 concatenated with _ and with an auto-incremented number.
In the current 2.7.0 code, there is this happy comment; I've also verified it is true :)
https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/sdks/python/apache_beam/io/gcp/bigquery.py#L1182
# Prepare rows for insertion. Of special note is the row ID that we add to
# each row in order to help BigQuery avoid inserting a row multiple times.
# BigQuery will do a best-effort if unique IDs are provided. This situation
# can happen during retries on failures.
* Don't use BigQuerySink
At least, not in it's current form as it doesn't support streaming. I guess that might change.
Original (non)answer
Great question, I also looked and couldn't find a certain answer.
Apache Beam doesn't appear to use that google.cloud.bigquery client sdk you've linked to, it has some internal generated api client, but it appears to be up-to-date.
I looked at the source:
The insertall method is there https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/18d2168ee71a1b1b04976717f0f955199bb00961/sdks/python/apache_beam/io/gcp/internal/clients/bigquery/bigquery_v2_client.py#L476
I also found the insertid mentioned
https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/sdks/python/apache_beam/io/gcp/internal/clients/bigquery/bigquery_v2_messages.py#L1707
So if you can make an InsertAll call it will use a TableDataInsertAllRequest and pass a RowsValueListEntry
class TableDataInsertAllRequest(_messages.Message):
"""A TableDataInsertAllRequest object.
Messages:
RowsValueListEntry: A RowsValueListEntry object.
The RowsValueListEntry message is where the insertid is.
Here's the API docs for insert all
https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs/reference/rest/v2/tabledata/insertAll
I will look some more at this because I don't see the WriteToBigQuery() exposing this.
I suspect that the 'bigquery will remember this for at least one minute` is a pretty loose guarantee for de-duping. The docs suggest using datastore if you need transactions. Otherwise you might need to run SQL with window functions to de-dupe at runtime, or run some other de-duping jobs on bigquery.
Perhaps using batch_size parameter of WriteToBigQuery(), and running a combine (or at worst a GroupByKey) step in dataflow is a more stable way to de-dupe prior to writing.
I want to optimize the space of my Big Query and google storage tables. Is there a way to find out easily the cumulative space that each field in a table gets? This is not straightforward in my case, since I have a complicated hierarchy with many repeated records.
You can do this in Web UI by simply typing (and not running) below query changing to field of your interest
SELECT <column_name>
FROM YourTable
and looking into Validation Message that consists of respective size
Important - you do not need to run it – just check validation message for bytesProcessed and this will be a size of respective column
Validation is free and invokes so called dry-run
If you need to do such “columns profiling” for many tables or for table with many columns - you can code this with your preferred language using Tables.get API to get table schema ; then loop thru all fields and build respective SELECT statement and finally Dry Run it (within the loop for each column) and get totalBytesProcessed which as you already know is the size of respective column
I don't think this is exposed in any of the meta data.
However, you may be able to easily get good approximations based on your needs. The number of rows is provided, so for some of the data types, you can directly calculate the size:
https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/pricing
For types such as string, you could get the average length by querying e.g. the first 1000 fields, and use this for your storage calculations.
I would like to receive a notification, ideally via email, when some threshold is met in Google BigQuery. For example, if the query is:
SELECT name, count(id) FROM terrible_things
WHERE date(terrible_thing) < -1d
Then I would want to get an alert when there were greater than 0 results, and I would want that alert to contain the name of each object and how many there were.
BigQuery does not provide the kinds of services you'd need to build this without involving other technologies. However, you should be able to use something like appengine (which does have a task scheduling mechanism) to periodically issue your monitoring query probe, check the results of the job, and alert if there are nonzero rows in the results. Alternately, you could do this locally using some scripting and leveraging the BQ command line tool.
You could also refine things by using BQ's table decorators to only scan the data that's arrived since you last ran your monitoring query, if you retain knowledge of the last probe's execution in the calling system.
In short: Something else needs to issue the queries and react based on the outcome, but BQ can certainly evaluate the data.
I am trying to use Lucene for doing undup or dedup match. Essentially I have a file with records which I want to group based on certain fields (fuzzy search) and get back a result with a match key that tells me which records within that file matched to each other.
Is this possible?
This can be done (if I understand this correctly). You would index your terms that/records will be searched on in one pass. In the second pass, you will search for each term and log results.
While pre-processing the document you can generate a hash that aggregate those fields, and store this (as NOT_ANALYZED), this way you just have to search by one field with a known size, take a look at MessageDigest. This is what I normally do for duplicate detection of the file content (since the content might be too big for a single query).
If what you are looking for is creating a more complex query, try using CachingWrapperFilter, this way subsequent calls to your deduplication algorithm will be much faster.