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.

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

Enable usage of metrics with same name but different labels #61

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

grota
Copy link
Contributor

@grota grota commented Jul 5, 2021

Hi there, this PR enables the user of this client lib to use different labels (names and values) for metrics.

Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Rota <rota.giuseppe@gmail.com>
@grota
Copy link
Contributor Author

grota commented Aug 20, 2021

can anyone review this? or at least start the checks?

@LKaemmerling
Copy link
Member

Hey @grota,

Sore for the late answer, i had a lot to do!

I’m not sure if this is the correct behavior. If I see it correctly none of the official libraries supports this.

@grota
Copy link
Contributor Author

grota commented Oct 2, 2021

Hi @LKaemmerling ok sorry for the pressure.
I see your point, I tested out a python client library and indeed it does not permit this behavior.
It's kinda strange because I'm testing a fork that does allow it and the prometheus backend does not complain.
But I understand the situation and I'm going to close this PR.

As a follow up question, would you be willing to accept a PR where we substitute private to protected in the InMemory storage?
We are developing a drupal module which is implementing a drupal cache based storage adapter which is leveraging/extending the InMemory class (the 4 class fields and metaKey()).
For the moment I had to resort to copying the class.

See for reference

@grota grota closed this Oct 2, 2021
@LKaemmerling
Copy link
Member

Hi @LKaemmerling ok sorry for the pressure.

I see your point, I tested out a python client library and indeed it does not permit this behavior.

It's kinda strange because I'm testing a fork that does allow it and the prometheus backend does not complain.

But I understand the situation and I'm going to close this PR.

As a follow up question, would you be willing to accept a PR where we substitute private to protected in the InMemory storage?

We are developing a drupal module which is implementing a drupal cache based storage adapter which is leveraging/extending the InMemory class (the 4 class fields and metaKey()).

For the moment I had to resort to copying the class.

See for reference

Hey @grota,

Would be fine for me :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants