Skip to:
I found that the threshold logging tracer still uses the "old" format:
[ { "service":"kv", "count":7935, "top":[ { "total_duration_us":95, "encode_duration_us":27, "last_dispatch_duration_us":18, "total_dispatch_duration_us":40, "last_server_duration_us":null, "total_server_duration_us":null, "operation_name":"get", "last_local_id":"2", "operation_id":"85414", "last_local_socket":"127.0.0.1:11210:56218", "last_remote_socket":"127.0.0.1:11210:56218" } .... ] } ]
vs. the new format in the rfc is described as:
{ “<service-a>”: { “total_count”: 1234, “top_requests”: [{<entry>}, {<entry>},...] }, “<service-b>”: { “total_count”: 1234, “top_requests”: [{<entry>}, {<entry>},...] }, }
I found that the threshold logging tracer still uses the "old" format:
[ { "service":"kv", "count":7935, "top":[ { "total_duration_us":95, "encode_duration_us":27, "last_dispatch_duration_us":18, "total_dispatch_duration_us":40, "last_server_duration_us":null, "total_server_duration_us":null, "operation_name":"get", "last_local_id":"2", "operation_id":"85414", "last_local_socket":"127.0.0.1:11210:56218", "last_remote_socket":"127.0.0.1:11210:56218" } .... ] } ]vs. the new format in the rfc is described as:
{ “<service-a>”: { “total_count”: 1234, “top_requests”: [{<entry>}, {<entry>},...] }, “<service-b>”: { “total_count”: 1234, “top_requests”: [{<entry>}, {<entry>},...] }, }