----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26233/#review55090 -----------------------------------------------------------
Would it make sense to wrap alerts into a table? E.g.: Name | Type | Description | Alerting | Triage -----|------|-------------|----------|-------- - Maxim Khutornenko On Oct. 1, 2014, 5:27 p.m., Bill Farner wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/26233/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Oct. 1, 2014, 5:27 p.m.) > > > Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney and Maxim Khutornenko. > > > Bugs: AURORA-634 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-634 > > > Repository: aurora > > > Description > ------- > > Add a monitoring guide. > > > Diffs > ----- > > docs/deploying-aurora-scheduler.md 9b6d526b22f2e39dfe95f494720f550d0b67d176 > docs/monitoring.md PRE-CREATION > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26233/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Rendered here: > https://github.com/wfarner/incubator-aurora/blob/wfarner/monitoring_guide/docs/monitoring.md > > I'm not terribly happy about the organization at the bottom, specifically the > wrapping of rate ratio. Happy to rework if anybody has a suggestion. > > > Thanks, > > Bill Farner > >
