A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection across metrics and logs

Re:A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection acros... by hnarn on Saturday March 28, 2020 @03:53PM (#22713853)

I don't know if the Prometheus devs care about it being an enterprise level monitoring software, but not having any type of backfilling on the road map pretty much disqualifies it. Accurate reporting is not a nice-to-have for enterprise grade monitoring.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection acros... by chaps on Saturday March 28, 2020 @04:13PM (#22713986)

FWIW, from the lead dev's own description on his "up and running" book, pretty much implying that they do, in fact, care about its use in large production systems:

"Get up to speed with Prometheus, the metrics-based monitoring system used by tens of thousands of organizations in production. This practical guide provides application developers, sysadmins, and DevOps practitioners with a hands-on introduction to the most important aspects of Prometheus, including dashboarding and alerting, direct code instrumentation, and metric collection from third-party systems with exporters."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection acros... by SuperQue on Saturday March 28, 2020 @05:14PM (#22714383)

Backfilling data is on the roadmap. It's already possible, the tools are being worked on.

Also, accurate reporting and backfill are not related.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection acros... by chaps on Saturday March 28, 2020 @05:44PM (#22714547)

It's been on the road map for at least two and a half years, so that's not very convincing: https://web.archive.org/web/20170708101602/https://prometheu...

Curious to know why you don't think accurate reporting and backfilling aren't related. In my experience, they absolutely are -- mostly during disaster scenarios, where that information is more critical than any other time.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection acros... by hnarn on Sunday March 29, 2020 @07:09AM (#22718004)

> accurate reporting and backfill are not related.

I strongly disagree. If you are unable to backfill data then report accuracy will be affected during multiple scenarios, including migrations from other products, unplanned downtime etc. Not having backfill is accepting that reports will suffer as soon as historical data is inaccurate and basically saying that you don't care.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection acros... by sagichmal on Saturday March 28, 2020 @04:52PM (#22714243)

Backfilling isn't necessary for "accurate reporting"?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection acros... by hnarn on Sunday March 29, 2020 @07:07AM (#22717992)

Is that a question? I think I pretty plainly stated that the answer to that question is yes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection acros... by sagichmal on Sunday March 29, 2020 @02:58PM (#22721558)

I'm confused because the statement doesn't make sense. Accurate reporting is orthogonal to the ability to backfill.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Prometheus fork for cloud scale anomaly detection acros... by chaps on Sunday March 29, 2020 @04:54PM (#22722636)

Take a breather. Pretty sure the confusion here is in the overloading and different contexts of "reporting". One kind of reporting is post-hoc, and the other is "real time" reporting for outages and such. There are probably other ways to define it, but let's try to figure out where the confusion is first. How are you defining "reporting" to where it's orthogonal to the ability to backfill?

[ Parent | on HN ]