> On Dec 20, 2023, at 11:07 AM, Miles Libbey wrote:
>
> Could these tools do something like call traffic_ctl config get
> proxy.config.metric_prefix instead of loading the full records.config?
Good idea. Yeh, they probably could, requires more work than I was willing to
invest at the time. :
Could these tools do something like call traffic_ctl config get
proxy.config.metric_prefix instead of loading the full records.config?
On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 9:03 PM Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>
>
> > On Dec 18, 2023, at 21:20, Walt Karas
> wrote:
> >
> > Is the current naming based on some SNMP MI
>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
> I did indeed try this route first, but it was difficult to find a
solution that works with our tools. traffic_top (etc.) doesn’t read
records.yaml, so it won’t know a change to the prefix.
I think it will be doable to have a record_alias.json or something like
that that traffic_ctl/top/etc maps
> On Dec 18, 2023, at 21:20, Walt Karas wrote:
>
> Is the current naming based on some SNMP MIB spec?
Doubtful, we had one 20+ years ago, but not any more.
>
> Personally, my indifference is boundless. This change will I think lead to
> some logistic aggravation, due to scripts that take m
Is the current naming based on some SNMP MIB spec?
Personally, my indifference is boundless. This change will I think lead to
some logistic aggravation, due to scripts that take metrics output as input.
Any chance it's worth it to make the prefix configurable?
On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 9:41 PM Ja
> On 18 Dec 2023, at 1:28 pm, Leif Hedstrom 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 enti
> On Dec 18, 2023, at 3:40 AM, Damian Meden
> 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 rec
+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 co
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
10 matches
Mail list logo
