Skip to content

docs: backport canary updates 3.6 - #21329

Merged
JStickler merged 2 commits into
release-3.6.xfrom
BP-21218_36
Mar 30, 2026
Merged

docs: backport canary updates 3.6#21329
JStickler merged 2 commits into
release-3.6.xfrom
BP-21218_36

Conversation

@JStickler

@JStickler JStickler commented Mar 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What this PR does / why we need it:

Manual backport of #21218 to the 3.6 branch.

Special notes for your reviewer:

The 3.6 branch shows a couple of additional changes (lines 326 and 352). I checked the history and 3.6 released Nov. 17, but those two news config options were introduced in #17008 on Dec 30. Not sure if I should pull them out or not if they're not in the 3.6 branch until 3.6.4? [REMOVED]


Note

Low Risk
Low risk: documentation-only changes, primarily clarifying deployment and scraping configuration without modifying runtime behavior.

Overview
Updates the Loki Canary operations doc to reflect that the canary writes logs to standard output (requiring capture to a file) and replaces older Promtail/pipeline guidance with Grafana Alloy references (including loki.process).

Refreshes the Docker pull example to a newer image tag and adds a new monolithic mode setup walkthrough with systemd output redirection plus Alloy/Prometheus snippets for scraping logs and metrics.

Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 561dcff. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.

@JStickler
JStickler requested a review from a team as a code owner March 30, 2026 19:02
@JStickler JStickler added the type/docs Issues related to technical documentation; the Docs Squad uses this label across many repositories label Mar 30, 2026
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Mar 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

💻 Deploy preview deleted (docs: backport canary updates 3.6).

@JStickler
JStickler merged commit 8cb5388 into release-3.6.x Mar 30, 2026
81 checks passed
@JStickler
JStickler deleted the BP-21218_36 branch March 30, 2026 19:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/M type/docs Issues related to technical documentation; the Docs Squad uses this label across many repositories

2 participants