You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 2, 2020. It is now read-only.
It could be beneficial for memory to store the md5 hash of metric instead of the metric name in memory. Currently, we keep the metric names in memory for the lifetime of application. Although, given the size of the metric (let's say 50 symbols), they'd use a max of 5mb given 100K processed metrics. Anyways, just an idea I thought still worth throwing in. Might be I underestimate the size the strings may take up.
PK of the metric can be the md5 hash. One can always reconstruct the hash from the metric name to run the query. The real metric name can be a static column (also could be beneficial for storage reasons as it's going to be repeated just once per partition), so it would get retrieved for the end result.
Obvious problem here is hash collisions, which in this particular case has no real solution. Even if we can detect the hash collision using some cardinality measure, we can't know which exactly metric this one collides with.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It could be beneficial for memory to store the md5 hash of metric instead of the metric name in memory. Currently, we keep the metric names in memory for the lifetime of application. Although, given the size of the metric (let's say 50 symbols), they'd use a max of 5mb given 100K processed metrics. Anyways, just an idea I thought still worth throwing in. Might be I underestimate the size the strings may take up.
PK of the
metric
can be the md5 hash. One can always reconstruct the hash from the metric name to run the query. The real metric name can be a static column (also could be beneficial for storage reasons as it's going to be repeated just once per partition), so it would get retrieved for the end result.Obvious problem here is hash collisions, which in this particular case has no real solution. Even if we can detect the hash collision using some cardinality measure, we can't know which exactly metric this one collides with.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: