Hello, The PR has been merged without running a formal VOTE. https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3501
I think that given the impact of this change for this time we can move forward and consider the BP "accepted" A few people already commented by "supporting" the BP Thoughts ? Enrico Il giorno mar 27 set 2022 alle ore 03:13 Yong Zhang <zhangyong1025...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > LGTM. > > Best, > Yong > > On Mon, 26 Sept 2022 at 15:56, wenbing shen <oliver.shen...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > +1 （non-binding） > > > > Thanks. > > Wenbing Shen > > > > ZhangJian He <shoot...@gmail.com> 于2022年9月26日周一 11:15写道： > > > > > +1 （non-binding） > > > > > > Thanks > > > ZhangJian He > > > > > > On Sun, 25 Sept 2022 at 20:45, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I agree > > > > > > > > Enrico > > > > > > > > Il Dom 25 Set 2022, 03:09 steven lu <lushiji2...@gmail.com> ha > > scritto: > > > > > > > > > Hi BookKeepers, I've changed the API for > > > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.stats.Counter: > > > > > BP-58 <https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/3502> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Motivation" > > > > > > > > > > The latency of the OpStatsLogger.registerSuccessfulEvent calculation > > is > > > > to > > > > > convert the time to milliseconds > > > > > but Counter.add nothing to do > > > > > so when using Counter for latency statistics, the time unit and > > > > > OpStatsLogger are not unified, which is easy to be misleading. > > > > > then we unified latency metric unit > > > > > > > > > > "Proposal" > > > > > > > > > > We already have the Counter metric for counting , we just need to > > > > refactor > > > > > it and expose it as a public method. > > > > > My idea is to change the API of org.apache.bookkeeper.stats.Counter > > > > > > > > > > when using Counter for count metric, use Counter.addCount,intead of > > old > > > > > API(Counter.add) > > > > > when using Counter for latency metric, use Counter.addLatency > > > > > > > > > > "Release" > > > > > > > > > > because it change the API,so we don't cherry pick this into released > > > > > branches > > > > > so it should go into a major release, like Release-4.16, then we can > > > > update > > > > > its implementation in other projects, like pulsar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think about it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
