Hmm... if we somehow mark a tuple as a "test" tuple or a "pilot" tuple, I
think we can do the same thing on it with the END_WINDOW tuple to calculate
the latency.

However, if there are many such tuples, it will for sure incur significant
cost and affect the latency itself, kinda like the Heisenberg's principle
-- you can't accurately measure an object because doing so will alter the
object itself.

David

On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Ganelin, Ilya <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I totally agree - I think any such functionality should be a configurable
> setting, and should not necessarily apply to every single tuple but
> perhaps be periodically computed for “test” tuples flowing through the
> system.
>
>
> On 11/17/15, 4:10 PM, "Pramod Immaneni" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I am wondering if accounting latency at a tuple level will add too much
> >overhead. It might be better to do it on a conditional basis.
> >
> >On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Ganelin, Ilya
> ><[email protected]>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Specifically, I¹m interested in being able to track latencies for
> >> individual tuples. For example, as they move through the BufferServer or
> >> the CircularBuffer.
> >>
> >> On 11/17/15, 3:12 PM, "David Yan" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi Ilya,
> >> >
> >> >The AutoMetric interface is mostly designed for application-specific
> >> >metrics within an operator -- things like how many frauds are
> >>detected, or
> >> >the dollar amount processed.
> >> >
> >> >We do have BufferServer bytes and queue tuple count (a.k.a. queue
> >>size) as
> >> >system metrics. If you have specific metrics that pertain to
> >>BufferServer
> >> >and CircularBuffer that you're interested in, please state them.  We
> >> >should
> >> >probably add them to system metrics since it's probably useful in
> >>general.
> >> >
> >> >David
> >> >
> >> >On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Pramod Immaneni
> >><[email protected]>
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Some of them are available in system stats like port queue size and
> >>are
> >> >> exposed via REST and to a stats listener that you can register via
> >>the
> >> >>API.
> >> >> Some of the others you mentioned can be added.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Ganelin, Ilya <
> >> >> [email protected]>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi, all ­ presently Apex supports surfacing metrics via the
> >> >>AutoMetrics
> >> >> > interface, documented here:
> >> >> > http://docs.datatorrent.com/autometrics/
> >> >> >
> >> >> > However, this only provides utility to monitor operators. I would
> >> >>like to
> >> >> > provide a more general latency suite - fFor example, I would like
> >>to
> >> >> > instrument metrics around the BufferServer or the CircularQueue.
> >>Not
> >> >> > everything in Apex is an operator, and there are other components
> >>of
> >> >>the
> >> >> > system around which we may want explicit measurements or metrics.
> >>Is
> >> >>this
> >> >> > something that could exist? I know other projects like Spark have
> >> >>similar
> >> >> > efforts, although they are equally underdeveloped :)
> >> >> > ________________________________________________________
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or
> >> >> > proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be
> >>used
> >> >> > solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The
> >> >> information
> >> >> > transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or
> >> >>entity
> >> >> > to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the
> >> >> intended
> >> >> > recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission,
> >> >> > dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of
> >>any
> >> >> > action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If
> >> >>you
> >> >> > have received this communication in error, please contact the
> >>sender
> >> >>and
> >> >> > delete the material from your computer.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________________________________
> >>
> >> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or
> >> proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used
> >> solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The
> >>information
> >> transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or
> >>entity
> >> to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the
> >>intended
> >> recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission,
> >> dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any
> >> action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you
> >> have received this communication in error, please contact the sender and
> >> delete the material from your computer.
> >>
> >>
>
> ________________________________________________________
>
> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or
> proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used
> solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The information
> transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or entity
> to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission,
> dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any
> action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you
> have received this communication in error, please contact the sender and
> delete the material from your computer.
>

Reply via email to