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

[Ulf Wiger]

exometer is already an abstraction layer on top of e.g. folsom, allowing you to use folsom metrics, native exometer metrics, or plug in your own.

I’d be happy to hear what specific functionality you need that cannot currently be provided via exometer.

BR,
Ulf W

On 09 May 2014, at 10:29, Motiejus Jakštys <desired.mta@REDACTED> wrote:

> Dear list,
> 
> we are open-sourcing an internal library to release in EUC2014[1].
> Currently it relies on estatsd (graphite) for instrumentation.
> 
> We instrument the following:
> 1. incr. success/error of calls (different keys).
> 2. time spent doing a request (different keys).
> 
> 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)}.
> 
> Is it feasible? Is there a more elegant way? I would very much love
> something like error_logger:
> 
>> error_logger:error_msg("Oops!").
> 
> How do you approach abstract instrumentation in a lean library?
> 
> Regards,
> Motiejus
> 
> [1]: http://www.erlang-factory.com/euc2014/motiejus-jaktys
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

Ulf Wiger, Co-founder & Developer Advocate, Feuerlabs Inc.
http://feuerlabs.com