We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Hi, @Lyt99 , I have doubts about the metric calculation logic in tracevirtcmdlat. The current logic is as follows:
if event.Latency > 100000000 { p.updateMetrics(VIRTCMD100MS) } else { p.updateMetrics(VIRTCMD) }
Would it be better to change it in this way? The VIRTCMD metric should contains the VIRTCMD100MS metric.
p.updateMetrics(VIRTCMD) if event.Latency > 100000000 { p.updateMetrics(VIRTCMD100MS) }
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi, thanks for your issue!
It's reasonable for me to make VIRTCMD contain VIRTCMD100MS, and so do other probes like socketlatency, kernellatnecy, etc.
socketlatency
kernellatnecy
If you are willing to, cloud you please take a look at these probes, and make a PR for it?
Sorry, something went wrong.
PR #194, please review 😄😄😄😄
No branches or pull requests
Hi, @Lyt99 , I have doubts about the metric calculation logic in tracevirtcmdlat.
The current logic is as follows:
Would it be better to change it in this way? The VIRTCMD metric should contains the VIRTCMD100MS metric.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: