I have read 
here https://www.robustperception.io/what-range-should-i-use-with-rate that 
I should stick to a single range for my rate() queries - especially in 
recording rules - and use avg_over_time() when I want to aggregate data for 
example in Grafana. Common ranges I also come across in the wild are 1m and 
5m. But what I don't fully understand it *what factors are decisive when 
choosing either 1m or 5m range as the base?*

Looking at GitLab, they have recording rules covering multiple ranges. And 
it's the same in their panels. Sometimes data with 5m ranges, sometimes 1m. 
I was not able to find an applicable pattern.

My environment: At any time a few hundred small targets online with a few 
hundred k up to single-digit million number of time series. Fairly low 
usage. So far from hundreds of requests per second or even minute. Meaning 
basically all my application specific counters are slow-moving. 

Considering all this: *Would you go for 1m or 5m range (to use in my 
recording rules)?* I definitely cannot use ad-hoc queries everywhere 
because especially dealing with histogram data gets very demanding after 
exceeding a certain number of time series in a query. 

Advantages of going with 1m:

   - more "spikey" graphs
   - closest to the raw data

Disadvantages of going with 1m:

   - too spikey, especially with slow-moving time series. Often I end up 
   with a lot of tall spikes close to each other. is this good or bad? 
   - users might interpret the graph as "exact" which is not the case. 

Advantages of going with 5m:

   - smooths out noise at lower time ranges
   - looks better at least with slow moving metrics like in my environment

Disadvantages of going with 5m:

   - losing too many details? 


I would be happy to know your (probably way more pragmatic) approach to 
this. 

Cheers, T.S. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prometheus Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/prometheus-users/cb354938-f770-48fd-9adb-0272e2c2d369o%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to