Johannes Bechberger
Johannes Bechberger
> Is the difference that you don't drop events? Otherwise, they seem similar. Yes. We cannot drop samples, else we have sampling bias. We use the period because this is...
The only option for throttling (or rate-limiting) that I see is to upper bound the amount of events generated by lower-bounding the allowed interval, computing the lower-bound of the interval...
I've settled for option 1, which significantly reduces the amount of code for this PR. Furthermore, there are now tests for the expected throttle behavior.
> Markus and I discussed the naming, and we are leaning against using "throttle" as the setting name. It is easier for users to understand if allocation, exception, socket read,...
How should I treat the `off` setting? I disabled the rate setting for now because it doesn't make any sense when the period can be arbitrarily small. Of course, I...
And how should I document the new behaviour? Add it to the documentation of the throttle annotation?
The only place where the current throttle syntax is defined seems to be the throttle annotation.
Especially the outdated libraries were a real hassle when I started maintaining the cf-java-plugin. Compared to other plugin frameworks, it's also notable that every plugin has to roll out its...