You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The open_ is arguably redundant, since a "file descriptor" is itself a representation of an open file (i.e. there's no such thing as counting closed_file_descriptors)
It can be confusing to Windows users, since on Windows you'd be counting Handles, a distinct windows exclusive concept, rather than file_descriptors.
Describe the solution you'd like
I suggest renaming the metric to process.file_descriptors, or process.unix.file_descriptors. At first glance I like unix being in the name, but this would be the first time we use that as a platform name so we'll need to think a bit about that before making that jump.
There will also be a metric called process.windows.handles in the future. Hopefully the presence of this metric will alleviate the platform confusion.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Area(s)
area:process
What's missing?
Note: first discussed in #1797
process.open_file_descriptors
has 2 problems:open_
is arguably redundant, since a "file descriptor" is itself a representation of an open file (i.e. there's no such thing as countingclosed_file_descriptors
)Handles
, a distinct windows exclusive concept, rather thanfile_descriptors
.Describe the solution you'd like
I suggest renaming the metric to
process.file_descriptors
, orprocess.unix.file_descriptors
. At first glance I likeunix
being in the name, but this would be the first time we use that as a platform name so we'll need to think a bit about that before making that jump.There will also be a metric called
process.windows.handles
in the future. Hopefully the presence of this metric will alleviate the platform confusion.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: