Currently we do not make visible per bucket stats. Is the above proposal just to change the internal implementation but the stats visible in tools like vsd are unchanged?
Currently we have an internal CachePerfStats which the internal RegionPerfStats extends. Does your CacheStats replace CachePerfStats and your RegionStats replace RegionPerfStats? Currently we have an internal PartitionedRegionStats class. Does your PartitionedRegionStats replace it? Are your "*Stats" interfaces and your "*StatsImpl" classes? On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 9:29 AM Mark Hanson <mhan...@pivotal.io> wrote: > It depends to be honest. This is just a plan. I would hope to roll them > up, but I can see a case where you have buckets on different servers, that > would seem to necessitate that. > > > On Jul 11, 2019, at 9:26 AM, Jacob Barrett <jbarr...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > There isn’t currently a partition stat instance per bucket. Are you > saying you’re making that a thing now? > > > >> On Jul 11, 2019, at 9:24 AM, Mark Hanson <mhan...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >> > >> Correct. > >> > >>> On Jul 11, 2019, at 9:23 AM, Darrel Schneider <dschnei...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Why would a PartitionedRegionStatsImpl contain more than one > RegionStats? > >>> Are these representing the local buckets? > >>> > >>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 4:57 PM Mark Hanson <mhan...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> PartitionRegionStatsImpl can contain one to many RegionStats > >>>> > >>>>> On Jul 10, 2019, at 4:53 PM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Seems reasonable. I'm guessing that CachePerfImpl contains many > >>>> RegionStats. Does PartitionRegionStatsImpl just contain a single > >>>> RegionStats? > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 4:49 PM Mark Hanson <mhan...@pivotal.io > <mailto: > >>>> mhan...@pivotal.io>> wrote: > >>>>> Hi All, > >>>>> > >>>>> As many of you may know our structure for our perf stats is not > great. I > >>>> would like to propose we refactor the code to have the following > >>>> inheritance model, which Kirk and I came up with. > >>>>> > >>>>> It is my belief that fixing this will allow future features to be > >>>> implemented in a much less painful way. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Mark > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >
