Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Timestamp is recommended over received_at when chronology matters #7

Open
jimmyocto opened this issue Nov 20, 2017 · 0 comments
Open

Timestamp is recommended over received_at when chronology matters #7

jimmyocto opened this issue Nov 20, 2017 · 0 comments

Comments

@jimmyocto
Copy link

jimmyocto commented Nov 20, 2017 •
edited
Loading

The Segment docs recommend using timestamp for historical analysis when chronology matters. In the case of this demo segment code we are ordering events within sessions. We should consider using timestamp instead of received_at.

https://segment.com/docs/spec/common/#timestamps

The tradeoff seems to be speed. Looks analyzing sessions seem to become much slower when we make this change.
@jimmyocto jimmyocto changed the title Timestamp is recommended over received_at Timestamp is recommended over received_at when chronology matters Nov 20, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@jimmyocto