Nobody Is Listening on Port 8125

I understand that you can do this, but I'm not sure i understand the rationale. I can't imagine that this is a hot enough path that this makes sense from a performance perspective, so why? What's the benefit?

Naively the thing this is replacing sounds like a much better solution than the replacement is.

It sounds like the solution simplifies something but I could not figure out how or what.

So: replace what should be a clear simple concise program using documented API that can be understood and debugged and improved … with an interface designed for completely different purposes, gaining absolutely nothing, losing debuggability, clarity, and extensibility. Yeah…

I suppose this article could be salvaged if it ended with something like “We get that this is an incredibly dumb idea, we’re just doing it for the lols. Please, nobody attempt something like this seriously, or in any production system. For educational purposes only.” But there isn’t any of that there.

Just wow.

Pretty strange thing to do. That aside, definitely AI written. The cadence is a dead giveaway.

> We replaced the listener with an eBPF program that watches port 8125 at the traffic control layer of every interface, and a JavaScript decoder that turns the lines into Prometheus families.

this is insane! Why on earth would one to replace a short, simple, highly debugable program with this crazy combination. Why would you trade a simple socket(2) call which shows up in ss, netstat, strace etc.. with something that opaque? Especially given the bandwidth is minuscule and the destination is already localhost.