>To distinguish from “config” ? I mean, it’s obviously a metric or stat at this point already :).
What I meant by this is, how do we know that `ats` means only `metric`? and not a config record. Anyway, I am +1 to drop the `proxy.process` . I am just inclined to have a prefix which can be used to scope what's on the right side of the prefix. Damian. On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 6:17 PM Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > On Dec 18, 2023, at 3:40 AM, Damian Meden > > <damian.me...@yahooinc.com.INVALID> > wrote: > > > > +1 to remove the `proxy.process` > > > > I don't like either #1 or #2 although I agree to have a single prefix. I > > think eventually we will have this same conversation about `proxy.config` > > so to me a name that means the scope of the record should be used, `ats` > > seems too generic as can also be used by a config record(unless this is > > what we want). > > > > Maybe just `metric` or `stat` could work. > > > To distinguish from “config” ? I mean, it’s obviously a metric or stat at > this point already :). > > > — Leif > > > > > Thanks. > > Damian. > > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 3:29 AM Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Through all our cleanup and refactoring in the past, as far as I can > tell, > >> all metrics are now prefixed with proxy.process. > >> > >> This seems a little superfluous. I’d like to suggests one of two > options: > >> > >> 1. Just drop the prefix entirely. > >> > >> 2. Replace the prefix with “ats”. > >> > >> > >> Thoughts? > >> > >> — Leif > >> > >> > >
