3 ms·

You continue to claim that VictoriaMetrics is backwards-compatible with Prometheus and only include a side-note that it actually is not in all cases. Such knowi

by jrv 7y ago

You continue to claim that VictoriaMetrics is backwards-compatible with Prometheus and only include a side-note that it actually is not in all cases. Such knowingly misleading statements are dangerous for users and the ecosystem. As for the more general point, my comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21772791 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21772791 stands. It's not about competition (we welcome and love that from all sides), it's about overly marketing a product on Prometheus OSS community channels, while at the same time not being clear about or ignoring compatibility issues that will for sure cause problems for the ecosystem. EDIT: One more point: The people seeing a problem around VM behavior here are not just Prometheus team members. Multiple external community members / users have pointed this out as well to us.

valyala 7y ago
> You continue to claim that VictoriaMetrics is backwards-compatible with Prometheus and only include a side-note that it actually is not in all cases * There are a few controversial cases where VictoriaMetrics' implementation for PromQL intentionally diverges from the original implementation in Prometheus. This discrepancy is needed because VictoriaMetrics tries hard to make PromQL more user-friendly at edge cases, which aren't solved for a long time on Prometheus side [1]. * Of course, there may be non-intentional discrepancies in PromQL implementation for VictoriaMetrics, because it is implemented from scratch without using Prometheus data model and source code. Such discrepancies are usually fixed as soon as users report about them. > It's not about competition (we welcome and love that from all sides) I see. Facts mentioned in this topic shows the real love :) [1] https://github.com/prometheus/prometheus/issues/3746 https://github.com/prometheus/prometheus/issues/3746
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
shitloadofbooks 7y ago
What more than a "side note" do you expect when someone claims backwards compatibility? I deployed Victoria Metrics into my environment and knew _exactly_ which parts deviated from Prometheus' PromQL implementation because it's in the docs. Some of the core Prometheus maintainers come across as arrogant and stubborn, which definitely hurts the ecosystem.

by jrv 7y ago

valyala 7y ago

> You continue to claim that VictoriaMetrics is backwards-compatible with Prometheus and only include a side-note that it actually is not in all cases * There are a few controversial cases where VictoriaMetrics' implementation for PromQL intentionally diverges from the original implementation in Prometheus. This discrepancy is needed because VictoriaMetrics tries hard to make PromQL more user-friendly at edge cases, which aren't solved for a long time on Prometheus side [1]. * Of course, there may be non-intentional discrepancies in PromQL implementation for VictoriaMetrics, because it is implemented from scratch without using Prometheus data model and source code. Such discrepancies are usually fixed as soon as users report about them. > It's not about competition (we welcome and love that from all sides) I see. Facts mentioned in this topic shows the real love :) [1] https://github.com/prometheus/prometheus/issues/3746 https://github.com/prometheus/prometheus/issues/3746

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

shitloadofbooks 7y ago

What more than a "side note" do you expect when someone claims backwards compatibility? I deployed Victoria Metrics into my environment and knew _exactly_ which parts deviated from Prometheus' PromQL implementation because it's in the docs. Some of the core Prometheus maintainers come across as arrogant and stubborn, which definitely hurts the ecosystem.