[erlang-questions] abstracting folsom, estatsd, exometer & co

Anthony Ramine <>
Fri May 9 11:01:04 CEST 2014


Please make a proper behaviour for this, passing closures for such long-lived things is asking for upgrade problems.

-- 
Anthony Ramine

Le 9 mai 2014 à 10:29, Motiejus Jakštys <> a écrit :

> I want users with other instrumentation tools to be able to use it
> successfully, therefore I would rather not depend on estatsd.
> 
> Alternative configuration comes to mind (Key :: [string()|atom()]) :
> 1. {success_callback, {M, F} :: fun((Key) -> ok)}.
> 2. {failure_callback, {M, F} :: fun((Key) -> ok)}.
> 3. {tc_callback, {M, F} :: fun((Key, ValueInMs) -> ok)}.




More information about the erlang-questions mailing list