| To: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [pcp] Metric name length restriction |
| From: | Paul Smith <psmith@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:43:46 +1100 (EST) |
| Cc: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <647293496.15259736.1453951646834.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <7EAFE6E6-1A6E-49FA-A331-DAA168E5320E@xxxxxxxxxx> <647293496.15259736.1453951646834.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Thread-index: | ovuIXNNNhE5JNKA5KNpyLSDS9v7MxQGP01go9YjOnsU= |
| Thread-topic: | Metric name length restriction |
Nothing in the MMV format restricting it? Trying to work out why Parfait has that explicitly limiting it. > On 28 Jan 2016, at 14:27, Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > ----- Original Message ----- >> Parfait currently restricts metric names to 63 characters I think. >> >> Is that restriction still in place within PCP? I'd that limit something that >> could be expanded on? > > To the best of my knowledge there's no specific limit set in PCP. There > are limits that will eventually come into play, where PDU sizes become > restricted to sane large values, so that pmcd never has to allocate very > large amounts of memory ... but not specifically to the sizes of metric > names (nor their sub-components). Likewise for instance names. > > cheers. > > -- > Nathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | pcp updates: merges, fixes, qa, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | pcp updates - pcp-pmwebd tweaks, Mark Goodwin |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [pcp] Metric name length restriction, Nathan Scott |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [pcp] Metric name length restriction, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |