Conversation
bwplotka
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cool, just I would add that outside of loop for readability and perhaps in some helper function for both histogram and samples?
c64ffa9 to
679959f
Compare
Good idea with the helper function. I'm just not certain about doing the histogram bit just yet because we still haven't implemented ingesting CT for histograms just yet. I can add this part once #14694 is merged |
8facb7e to
fa7066a
Compare
|
Hello from the bug scrub. Please update due to conflicts and also that #14694 has been merged. |
|
Oh I completely forgot this PR existed lol. Will do, thanks for the ping! |
fa7066a to
617600d
Compare
|
@bwplotka, this should be ready for another review! |
bwplotka
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, one readability nit only, up to you if you want to modify it a bit.
Signed-off-by: Arthur Silva Sens <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Arthur Silva Sens <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Arthur Silva Sens <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Arthur Silva Sens <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Arthur Silva Sens <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Arthur Silva Sens <[email protected]>
5fe750c to
b7a5e28
Compare
PRWv2 adds support for Created Timestamp in its protocol, but at the moment we're not doing anything with it.
This PR proposes that we ingest them as a zero sample if the feature-flag
created-timestamp-zero-ingestionis enabled, just like we do when scraping.