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

Added new fields; removed deprecated fields; clarified recommended settings #4381

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 19, 2021

Conversation

jeffreycs
Copy link
Contributor

Three updates to the NRQL section:

  • I've added the fields that were introduced with our new aggregation methods, which replace the deprecated evaluation_offset and since_value fields
  • I've removed the deprecated fields from the example code
  • I've adjusted the recommended values for aggregation_window and aggregation_delay to represent they're in seconds rather than minutes, addressing @HenryTech's comment here

I do have a question — by linking to their glossary definitions, is it clear that you need either aggregation_delay or aggregation_timer depending on which aggregation_method you've selected?

…ttings

Three updates to the NRQL section:

* I've added the fields that were introduced with our new [aggregation methods](https://discuss.newrelic.com/t/new-aggregation-methods-for-nrql-alert-conditions/158831), which replace the deprecated `evaluation_offset` and `since_value` fields
* I've removed the deprecated fields from the example code
* I've adjusted the recommended values for `aggregation_window` and `aggregation_delay` to represent they're in seconds rather than minutes, addressing @HenryTech's comment [here](newrelic#4368 (comment))

I do have a question — by linking to their glossary definitions, is it clear that you need either `aggregation_delay` _or_ `aggregation_timer` depending on which `aggregation_method` you've selected?
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Oct 18, 2021

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@jeffreycs jeffreycs changed the title Added new fields; removed deprecated fields; clarified recommended se… Added new fields; removed deprecated fields; clarified recommended settings Oct 18, 2021
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to Hero to triage in Docs PRs and Issues Oct 18, 2021
@github-actions
Copy link

Hi @jeffreycs 👋
Thanks for your pull request! Your PR is in a queue, and a writer will take a look soon. We generally publish small edits within one business day, and larger edits within three days.

@jeffreycs
Copy link
Contributor Author

jeffreycs commented Oct 18, 2021

Well...... I've now realized that all the links to the glossary definitions are broken, likely due to a path change. I also appear to have missed an instance of since_value.

@gatsby-cloud
Copy link

gatsby-cloud bot commented Oct 18, 2021

Gatsby Cloud Build Report

docs-website-develop

🎉 Your build was successful! See the Deploy preview here.

Build Details

View the build logs here.

🕐 Build time: 15m

@paperclypse paperclypse added content requests related to docs site content from_internal Identifies issues/PRs from Relics (except writers) labels Oct 18, 2021
@paperclypse
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @jeffreycs! I'll look it over and see what I can do to get that sorted out.

@paperclypse paperclypse moved this from Hero to triage to Hero: To do in Docs PRs and Issues Oct 18, 2021
@paperclypse paperclypse self-assigned this Oct 18, 2021
@paperclypse paperclypse moved this from Hero: To do to In progress/being reviewed (by Hero or any TW) in Docs PRs and Issues Oct 19, 2021
There's an issue when linking to redirect URLs. I updated them to use the direct URL.
@paperclypse
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @jeffreycs, apparently we have an issue on our site when we link to pages through a redirect URL. It drops the ID. I've updated the URLs so we're using the direct URL.

Would you mind clarifying what you mean by "I also appear to have missed an instance of since_value."? Is there anything that I need to take care of there?

@paperclypse paperclypse self-requested a review October 19, 2021 18:42
I'd mistakenly left in one additional instance of a deprecated field; it is now removed
@jeffreycs
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @paperclypse! What I had meant is that I accidentally left one instance of a deprecated field. I just pushed a new commit that removes it.

Copy link
Contributor

@paperclypse paperclypse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good!

@paperclypse paperclypse merged commit 0f19d77 into newrelic:develop Oct 19, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
content requests related to docs site content from_internal Identifies issues/PRs from Relics (except writers)
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants