graphite-dev team mailing list archive

[chrismd <question171842@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #171842 on Graphite changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/graphite/+question/171842

    Status: Open => Answered

chrismd proposed the following answer:
I'd prefer to avoid changing the protocol unless there is a good case
for doing so. I realize specifying the metric name for each datapoint is
very redundant if you're sending lots of datapoints for a single metric
but in my experience that is a very rare use case with Graphite. Usually
you send a datapoint to Graphite as soon as it is available rather than
in a batch fashion (not that this doesn't happen, its just far less
common). So the common case is to have one datapoint at a time for each
metric, and adding another container in the structure for each metric
that has to get unpickled and iterated will *probably* (pure conjecture)
add non-trivial overhead to the common case with the side effect of
optimizing the less common batch loading case. So basically the argument
goes, why make it a list of datapoints when that list will have exactly
one element 99.999% of the time?

-- 
You received this question notification because you are a member of
graphite-dev, which is an answer contact for Graphite.