[HN Gopher] The four pillars of data observability: metrics, met...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The four pillars of data observability: metrics, metadata, lineage,
       and logs
        
       Author : kzh_
       Score  : 116 points
       Date   : 2022-08-11 12:38 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.metaplane.dev)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.metaplane.dev)
        
       | pbowyer wrote:
       | We're good at logging text, but how do you handle logging assets
       | (images, audio - anything non-textual but generated) and
       | associating them with your logs?
       | 
       | For example an image processing pipeline. You don't always want
       | to log (it'd never scale) but as part of a trace you might want
       | to keep the intermediate files so you can track down where the
       | problem is. You've already got text logging for each step,
       | recording metrics like duration and which filters were involved.
       | I have saved files and referenced them in the logfile, but no log
       | viewers I've seen understand anything beyond text. So I then have
       | to build my own UI or open the images in turn.
       | 
       | Is there a pattern to handle this?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | kzh_ wrote:
         | +1 on existing log viewers being particularly well suited for
         | text over non-textual assets. My experience here is limited but
         | I believe Grafana has a dynamic image plugin if you store a
         | link to an asset in blob storage or Base64 encode it.
         | 
         | I've also heard of people storing those links in a database
         | like Snowflake then creating displays on top using Tableau or
         | Looker, to avoid having to build a web app from scratch.
        
         | pm90 wrote:
         | Maybe wild idea: generate a unique text identifier for the
         | image + an s3 url, log that identifier rather than the image. I
         | guess its logging metadata rather than the actual data.
        
         | SnowHill9902 wrote:
         | - unused memory is wasted, you may be able to store the raw
         | image. - if your process is deterministic store a hash. - store
         | a low resolution image.
        
         | nerdponx wrote:
         | It might be interesting to have something like "statistical
         | logging", which saves the intermediate image files 1% of the
         | time and discards them after 30 days.
        
       | awinter-py wrote:
       | nobody needs this new saas stuff. I prefer the traditional
       | pillars of: emails from users, live chat feature in product where
       | users shame you publicly if something is wrong, twitter search
       | 'is X down', and 4) having laptop open in passenger seat on
       | commute, tethered to blackberry, and periodically hitting F5 on
       | the page which hits the most APIs
        
       | swordsmith8 wrote:
       | Seems like the the key pillars are: freshness, volume, schema,
       | distribution, and lineage.
       | 
       | Makes more sense this way, I think...
       | 
       | If you think about metrics, traces, and logs (software
       | observability pillars) as three distinct things, it's hard to
       | view metadata separate from metadata, lineage, or logs. Metadata
       | is kind of the glue that holds everything together.
       | 
       | This article has more relevant sources, IMO, even if it is from a
       | SaaS vendor.
       | 
       | https://www.montecarlodata.com/blog-what-is-data-observabili...
        
       | xcambar wrote:
       | Off topic: there seems to be a growing trend at HN of posts
       | reaching the homepage with a reasonable number of upvotes yet
       | without comments.
       | 
       | I don't know how to proceed with these posts (and this one), yet
       | the temptation of mentally flagging these as friendly upvotes or
       | point hoarders is strong, and I must admit that such posts
       | receive less attention and more suspicion from me.
       | 
       | YMMV.
        
         | kzh_ wrote:
         | OP here, I posted this a few days ago and was surprised to see
         | it on the front page this morning. Not sure why it says I
         | submitted 4 hours ago when I wasn't awake, maybe the second-
         | chance pool (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26998308)?
         | 
         | But I'm also generally skeptical of high upvote/comment ratios,
         | because as a long-time HNer too I also want to read things that
         | are genuinely interesting. In this case, I can promise you
         | neither I nor anyone on the team is soliciting upvotes for this
         | post.
         | 
         | On that note, if anyone has any comments about the content
         | itself, happy to discuss further.
        
           | xcambar wrote:
           | Thanks for commenting constructively. As you have umderstood,
           | my intention was never to point fingers at you or your
           | article, but rather use it as a suitable context to confront
           | with the HN crowd.
           | 
           | Thanks for having seen this from the start :)
        
         | metadat wrote:
         | Edit: I went and read TFA, and must say there were some red
         | flags. CS people who add "PhD" beside their name are not only
         | pretentious, but are trying to throw their academic weight
         | around instead of letting their ideas and presentation stand on
         | its own. Filled with more marketing fluff than useful
         | information. Ugh.
         | 
         | I'm siding with you on this. I've "undowned" you and upvoted
         | instead; Sorry xcamber!
         | 
         | --
         | 
         | If you're really concerned, email dang (hn@ycombinator.com) and
         | ask him to look into it. As a sidenote, if you actually flag
         | out of suspicion of a voting ring or other feelings without
         | real evidence, it is abusing the power you've been entrusted
         | with. Threads like this one are also way off topic, seems more
         | considerate to submit an "Ask HN" post rather than hijack the
         | story discussion.
         | 
         | The group dynamics are often surprising on HN.
        
           | kzh_ wrote:
           | OP here, I only try to write and share things that I find
           | personally interesting, so if it came across as marketing
           | fluff that was the opposite of what I was aiming for :/. But
           | I do appreciate you reading the whole thing. FWIW I also
           | thought including PhD might be pretentious.
        
             | ctxc wrote:
             | Hi OP! It would be nice to have some examples to go with
             | the article. Some set of minimum data and sample "lineage"
             | etc.
             | 
             | This has broadened my perception of data though, I never
             | linked this with the good old thermodynamic principles.
        
               | kzh_ wrote:
               | Thanks for reading! Including examples is a great point,
               | because otherwise the article can be kind of abstract,
               | especially because each person has a different mental
               | model of data. I'll add some later on.
               | 
               | Maybe thermodynamics is a hammer that makes all things
               | seem like nails, but the connections pop up all over the
               | place. Entropy is another highly applicable concept to
               | data systems.
        
             | Archelaos wrote:
             | I would say inlcuding CEO is far more pretentious. A PhD at
             | least means something more substantial, because it requires
             | an external certification.
        
               | Dwolb wrote:
               | Adding "PhD" and other credentialed titles is standard
               | SEO practice these days.
               | 
               | The thought is Google sees the article as from a
               | "credible source" and ranks you higher.
        
         | vbezhenar wrote:
         | My guess is that people are interested with this topic and want
         | to read discussions from other people, but don't really have
         | anything to add right now. Sometimes I upvote topics using
         | those thoughts.
        
         | rubiquity wrote:
         | You could try reading the article and commenting with your own
         | original thoughts.
        
           | xcambar wrote:
           | What makes you assume I did not read?
           | 
           | How shocking is it that, on some article and topic, I do not
           | have a comment I deem interesting enough to share?
           | 
           | Besides, if you do not appreciate my specificly off-topic
           | contribution, then so be it.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | xiande04 wrote:
             | > What makes you assume I did not read?
             | 
             | OP didn't say you didn't read it. They said that you didn't
             | read it AND attempt to start a meaningful discussion about
             | it, which exactly what you were complaining about, right?
        
               | xcambar wrote:
               | If you mean meaningful with regards to the topic, I'd
               | agree with you and knew it from the start, hence the
               | "off-topic" warning.
               | 
               | My intention was to confront my experience and behavior
               | (towards certain categories of posts of high
               | upvotes/comment ratio) with the rest of the HN crowd, in
               | a contextualized environment where it applies.
               | 
               | I'm sorry that the conversation now revolves around my
               | own comment. Kinda ironic.
        
           | kordlessagain wrote:
           | All you need are logs.
           | 
           | Also, https://honeycomb.io looks pretty dope.
        
             | metadat wrote:
             | The honeycomb-dot-io case was bad, I attended their
             | conference once and it was like I'd been suckered into a
             | neverending timeshare sales tour. Thankfully I haven't
             | noticed the domain on the frontpage lately.
             | 
             | Compare:
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=honeycomb.io
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=metaplane.dev
             | 
             | Both look like they want to game HN pretty hard. If only
             | they'd publish actual novel or interesting information
             | instead of thinly veiled SaaS marketing!
        
         | ctxc wrote:
         | Fair point. Although I must admit it affects (people like?) me
         | directly - I make it a point to always go through the comments
         | before I read the article as a matter of habit.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-08-14 23:01 UTC)