[Hawkular-dev] Tag concept in metrics and alerts

[John Sanda]

This is exactly what we have in mind as well as wild cards, e.g., btm_id=<some unique id for the transaction instance>, service_type=<service associated with metric>, operation=*

> On Jun 24, 2015, at 7:51 AM, Gary Brown <gbrown at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi John
> 
> Thanks for the clarification - that fits with how I need to use metrics. So for example, I may have btm_id=<some unique id for the transaction instance>, and possibly service_type=<service associated with the metric>, operation=<op name> - so assume they would all be ok?
> 
> Regards
> Gary
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Originally tags were implemented just as a label, not a key/value pair. I saw
>> that a number of other time series dbs use key/value pairs and decided to
>> make the change. It can also produce more efficient queries. For example,
>> filtering against N labels would require querying N partitions (in the
>> original schema). Querying against one tag name with N different values
>> however would only require querying 1 partition.
>> 
>>> On Jun 24, 2015, at 6:25 AM, Michael Burman <miburman at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I don't agree with changing the terms. Many of metrics competing products
>>> (such as InfluxDB / OpenTSDB) use the same terminology, so it is easier
>>> for customers to understand the differences and similarities between
>>> products. Using different terminology was one of the difficulties in RHQ
>>> (like noted in the F2F meeting) and I don't think we should repeat the
>>> same mistake.
>>> 
>>> - Micke
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Gary Brown" <gbrown at redhat.com>
>>> To: "Discussions around Hawkular development"
>>> <hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 11:45:56 AM
>>> Subject: [Hawkular-dev] Tag concept in metrics and alerts
>>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> Both metrics and alerts use the term 'tag' - however metrics use a
>>> name/value pair for a tag, and alerts uses it as a label. Wondering
>>> whether we need consistency?
>>> 
>>> When I hear the term tag, I usually envisage a label - e.g. as in git. So
>>> wondering whether it would be clearer for metrics to rename tags to
>>> properties?
>>> 
>>> Possibly metrics needs the concept of a tag/label as well?
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> Gary
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> hawkular-dev mailing list
>>> hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> hawkular-dev mailing list
>>> hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> hawkular-dev mailing list
>> hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> hawkular-dev mailing list
> hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev