feat(search): Implement projections for materialize labels #118
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Jesus Vazquez <[email protected]>
jesusvazquez
force-pushed
the
jvp/projection-labels
branch
from
aab6f1b to
0b96a23
Compare
Signed-off-by: Jesus Vazquez <[email protected]>
jesusvazquez
force-pushed
the
jvp/projection-labels
branch
from
0b96a23 to
d7c57a3
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Attempt to implement projections since we previously added the hash in the converter #111 and the prometheus dependency was updated to include the ProjectionHints.
Note that there is a flag to enable this in the materializer, if said flag is false the library will continue to materialize all labels.
Another thing to note is that x_series_hash needs to be passed down as a hint for the library to promote the hash. I was wondering between a) the library just doing it or b) the caller knowing that if they want the hash they need to ask for it. I decided to go for b) because i guess its more optimal everytime you dont need the hash. We can discuss this.
I still want to add a high level test to test a basic aggregation working so leaving it as draft.