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

Get a list of available metrics #426

Open
tzach opened this issue Apr 1, 2015 · 3 comments
Open

Get a list of available metrics #426

tzach opened this issue Apr 1, 2015 · 3 comments

Comments

@tzach
Copy link

tzach commented Apr 1, 2015

With Graphite, I can get a tree of all available metrics.
Is there a similar feature in Tessera?
Can I get the collected metrics without switching to Graphite?

@clohtd
Copy link

clohtd commented Apr 1, 2015

Hello,

Tessera is currently only about presentation; it is absent the query composer of other tools. That particular feature is one that many of us desire.

This is on the front page, second paragraph:

https://github.com/urbanairship/tessera
Tessera is initially focused on information presentation - it does not NOT address the areas of metric discovery or query composition (although it may in the future).

@tzach
Copy link
Author

tzach commented Apr 1, 2015

Thanks for the prompt response.
The presentation is indeed beautiful!

@aalpern
Copy link
Member

aalpern commented Apr 9, 2015

@tzach I do have some future plans for a more extensive graph builder which will probably involve some basic metric picking. In the end you're always going to need to edit queries yourself, however, as I don't really want to go down the route that Grafana has taken, with a Graphite query expression parser and a complicated visual builder for them. Especially when you add templates into the mix, good old fashioned text editing is best.

My personal workflow for building dashboards involves choosing metrics in Graphite's built in graph editor, finalizing and templatizing the queries in an emacs buffer, and then pasting the query into tessera.

Obviously having a single-tool workflow would be ideal, but not if it involves too many compromises.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants