influxdata / influxdata/kapacitor
about deadman rule
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 2.4k
- Forks
- 479
- Avg merge
- 4d 16h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 4
Description
Hi there.
I have a TICKscripts looks like
```tick
var data = batch
|query("I SELECT A MAX VALUE HERE")
.period(10m)
.cron('0 * * * *')
data
|stats(60m)
.align()
|derivative('emitted')
.unit(60m)
.nonNegative()
|alert()
.crit(lambda: "emitted" == 0)
.noRecoveries()
(... omit ...)
```
I checked the log and ensured the query returned me records. why is deadman still trigged? (according to https://docs.influxdata.com/kapacitor/v1.6/nodes/stream_node/#deadman. I think my pipeline equals to deadman so I called it) if I do something stupid, how could I improve it?
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the linked Kapacitor deadman documentation and trace how the shown TICKscript uses batch data, stats, derivative, and alert nodes. Compare the pipeline's behavior with the documented deadman semantics; done means explaining why the alert triggers and what pipeline change, if any, is required.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- observability
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100