Re: [Hawkular-dev] Hawkular Metrics - /data enpoint
On 4 Apr 2016, at 23:03, John Sanda wrote:
based bucketing as opposed to the date range bucketing already have.
There are some minor differences in the data structures returned in
the response, namely a map is returned instead of an array. Should we
have a different endpoints for tag based buckets vs date range
buckets?
If that stays in the same endpoint, then we need to
return different content-types
We can't have clients guessing here.
do they simply or otherwise improve things for clients? I am a little
concerned that we might be letting our implementation bleed into the
API a little too much. For example, we segment our data in our schema
design by metric type. Do we necessarily need to do that everywhere in
the API?
I agree. We can do a lot more via content-negotiation.
The data structure to add a single (raw) data point or a list
of data points that belong to different metric-ids is already
much too complicated.
There may in the future clients like on the photo of [1] or [2]
out there that may want to directly send data into h-metrics.
There you don't want to fiddle with object mappers to understand
complex structures and all that.
[1]
http://pilhuhn.blogspot.de/2016/02/sending-iot-sensor-data-to-hawkular.html
[2] https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoMKR1000