Most purpose-built time-series stuff isn't really necessary for much of what I see people trying to use it for.
My question (to everyone): what do you use as replacement for kibana or grafana?
As dashboards for Prometheus, you can currently use PromDash (http://prometheus.io/docs/visualization/promdash/), Console HTML templates (http://prometheus.io/docs/visualization/consoles/), or Grafana (http://prometheus.io/docs/visualization/grafana/).
Durable long-term storage is still outstanding. Although replication into OpenTSDB and InfluxDB is experimentally there.
We've been through a number of data stores ourselves, starting with Postgres back in 2010 - then on to Redis + Cassandra before we built our own. But that's a story for another post...
> 30 seconds
Ugh, that's terrible. grepping the file or reading and parsing a csv file is probably faster.
There's your problem. If you're at the "make it fast" part of "make it work, make it right, make it fast", you should almost certainly be on dedicated hardware.
In 0.8 and before, the preferred way to model your data was to create many separate series names. This method is currently giving many users great performance.
As with all databases, how you model your schema has a significant impact on performance.
That being said, it might be that Influx wasn't right for your use case and Postgres is just a better thing to go with.
Also, we're not supporting anything prior to the 0.9 series of releases. 0.8 is deprecated and we'll be pushing everyone to move over to 0.9 as we put out more point releases and fix bugs and ensure that it works for their use case over the coming months.
Then all the files have a prefix that look like <startsec>_<startmicrosec>_<metric>. A binary search is perfomed first on files in order to pick the right files only. Then the index is read into memory, then binary search performed on the index to get the offset range and then the main data file is read.
When switching to new file time chunk, a cleanup action is peformed where previous old files are removed.
https://influxdb.com/blog/2015/07/02/InfluxDB-0_9_1-and-Tele...
Can you name some examples of this besides the CPU authentication bug? Honest question, I'm considering adding InfluxDB to our stack so I'm genuinely curious.
This by itself wouldn't be a problem for us. But when you're inserting data points, the entire damn thing seems to become unresponsive. Admin UI freezing, http endpoint no longer responding to queries, ...
I know this product is relatively young and your mileage may vary. They have a long way to go.
It pains me to UPDATE and DELETE, thereby destroying useful data.
> to [InfluxDB's] credit it barely moved beyond idle resource usage when I was stuffing it full of data.
solution: always be cramming it full of data ?
I don't see how it could idle when you're bulk writing, but when it's not serving any traffic it's taking up 50% of cpu (unless it's doing some kind of indexing or cleanup or something in the background, but you would expect that to eventually quiesce).
The migration was prompted by influxDB 0.8 eating 50% of the VPS' cpu and 77% of the ram while idling. It had no capability to index along anything but time so every query, for my use case, required a full table scan. 0.9 was supposed to fix every issue I had with it but it was due to be 'production ready' months ago.
Unless you're dealing with ingesting an absolutely insane amount of data indexed along time, I'd have to say that postgres or comparable sql database should be more comfortable, more stable, and much more mature.
EDIT: I don't want to come off as shitting all over influxDB, to its credit it barely moved beyond idle resource usage when I was stuffing it full of data.