We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
In ExponentiallyDecayingReservoir, if enough time has passed since you created it (~13+ hours), the weight calculation https://github.com/dropwizard/metrics/blob/master/metrics-core/src/main/java/com/codahale/metrics/ExponentiallyDecayingReservoir.java#L97 returns Double.Infinity, causing priority to be also Double.Infinity, causing collisions in the Map and therefore no new updates (assuming newCount > size).
ExponentiallyDecayingReservoir
Double.Infinity
priority
Map
newCount > size
update calls are therefore almost no-op. They only increment the count.
update
count
We originally noticed this in the .NET port https://github.com/danielcrenna/metrics-net/issues/45.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Does longPeriodsOfInactivityShouldNotCorruptSamplingState test not cover this concern?
Sorry, something went wrong.
You're right, it does.
Should be fixed by #1033
ryantenney
No branches or pull requests
In
ExponentiallyDecayingReservoir
, if enough time has passed since you created it (~13+ hours), the weight calculation https://github.com/dropwizard/metrics/blob/master/metrics-core/src/main/java/com/codahale/metrics/ExponentiallyDecayingReservoir.java#L97 returnsDouble.Infinity
, causingpriority
to be alsoDouble.Infinity
, causing collisions in theMap
and therefore no new updates (assumingnewCount > size
).update
calls are therefore almost no-op. They only increment thecount
.We originally noticed this in the .NET port https://github.com/danielcrenna/metrics-net/issues/45.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: